Fortune Minerals Limited
Fortune Minerals Limited FT.TO Peers
See (FT.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Stock Comparison
FT.TO vs TECK-A.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TECK-A.TO has a market cap of 24.27B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TECK-A.TO trades at $48.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TECK-A.TO's P/E ratio is 692.86. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TECK-A.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TECK-A.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs TECK-B.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TECK-B.TO has a market cap of 24.19B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TECK-B.TO trades at $48.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TECK-B.TO's P/E ratio is 690.43. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TECK-B.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TECK-B.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs IVN.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, IVN.TO has a market cap of 18.12B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while IVN.TO trades at $13.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas IVN.TO's P/E ratio is 30.45. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to IVN.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to IVN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs AKE.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AKE.TO has a market cap of 5.68B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AKE.TO trades at $8.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AKE.TO's P/E ratio is 9.53. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AKE.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to AKE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs FIL.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FIL.TO has a market cap of 4.37B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FIL.TO trades at $32.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FIL.TO's P/E ratio is -31.01. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FIL.TO's ROE of -1.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to FIL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NGEX.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NGEX.TO has a market cap of 2.63B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NGEX.TO trades at $12.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NGEX.TO's P/E ratio is -38.52. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NGEX.TO's ROE of -0.72%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NGEX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SKE.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SKE.TO has a market cap of 1.96B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SKE.TO trades at $17.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SKE.TO's P/E ratio is -11.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SKE.TO's ROE of -1.34%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SKE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs FOM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FOM.TO has a market cap of 1.45B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FOM.TO trades at $3.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FOM.TO's P/E ratio is -69.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FOM.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to FOM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ALS.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ALS.TO has a market cap of 1.21B. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ALS.TO trades at $26.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ALS.TO's P/E ratio is 12.38. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ALS.TO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ALS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LAC.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LAC.TO has a market cap of 956.48M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LAC.TO trades at $4.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LAC.TO's P/E ratio is -15.07. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LAC.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LAC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs VZLA.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VZLA.TO has a market cap of 913.47M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VZLA.TO trades at $3.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VZLA.TO's P/E ratio is -105.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VZLA.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to VZLA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NDM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NDM.TO has a market cap of 775.56M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NDM.TO trades at $1.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NDM.TO's P/E ratio is -20.57. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NDM.TO's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NDM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MDI.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MDI.TO has a market cap of 704.68M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MDI.TO trades at $8.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MDI.TO's P/E ratio is 20.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MDI.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to MDI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs AII.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AII.TO has a market cap of 695.64M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AII.TO trades at $2.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AII.TO's P/E ratio is -41.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AII.TO's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to AII.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LAAC.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LAAC.TO has a market cap of 633.14M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LAAC.TO trades at $3.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LAAC.TO's P/E ratio is -39.10. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LAAC.TO's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LAAC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs POM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, POM.TO has a market cap of 552.27M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while POM.TO trades at $2.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas POM.TO's P/E ratio is -10.52. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to POM.TO's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to POM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs USA.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, USA.TO has a market cap of 527.02M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while USA.TO trades at $0.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas USA.TO's P/E ratio is -3.46. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to USA.TO's ROE of -0.99%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to USA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs FVL.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FVL.TO has a market cap of 507.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FVL.TO trades at $0.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FVL.TO's P/E ratio is -96.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FVL.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to FVL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ETG.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ETG.TO has a market cap of 474.95M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ETG.TO trades at $2.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ETG.TO's P/E ratio is -32.71. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ETG.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ETG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SOLG.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SOLG.TO has a market cap of 405.15M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SOLG.TO trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SOLG.TO's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SOLG.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SOLG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs TMQ.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TMQ.TO has a market cap of 372.77M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TMQ.TO trades at $2.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TMQ.TO's P/E ratio is -32.43. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TMQ.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TMQ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs PMET.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PMET.TO has a market cap of 363.01M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PMET.TO trades at $2.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PMET.TO's P/E ratio is -57.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PMET.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to PMET.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LUCA.V Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LUCA.V has a market cap of 361.67M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LUCA.V trades at $1.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LUCA.V's P/E ratio is -17.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LUCA.V's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LUCA.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ERD.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ERD.TO has a market cap of 319.46M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ERD.TO trades at $0.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ERD.TO's P/E ratio is -44.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ERD.TO's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ERD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs WRN.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, WRN.TO has a market cap of 316.00M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while WRN.TO trades at $1.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas WRN.TO's P/E ratio is -39.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to WRN.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to WRN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LIRC.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LIRC.TO has a market cap of 299.95M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LIRC.TO trades at $5.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LIRC.TO's P/E ratio is -75.71. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LIRC.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LIRC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LIFT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LIFT.CN has a market cap of 275.99M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LIFT.CN trades at $7.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LIFT.CN's P/E ratio is 50.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LIFT.CN's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LIFT.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs GLO.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GLO.TO has a market cap of 274.18M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GLO.TO trades at $0.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GLO.TO's P/E ratio is 22.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GLO.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to GLO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ECOR.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ECOR.TO has a market cap of 260.83M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ECOR.TO trades at $1.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ECOR.TO's P/E ratio is -21.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ECOR.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ECOR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MNO.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MNO.TO has a market cap of 252.72M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MNO.TO trades at $0.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MNO.TO's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MNO.TO's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to MNO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SMT.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SMT.TO has a market cap of 237.54M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SMT.TO trades at $1.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SMT.TO's P/E ratio is 11.20. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SMT.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SMT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs TLG.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TLG.TO has a market cap of 237.34M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TLG.TO trades at $0.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TLG.TO's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TLG.TO's ROE of -0.97%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TLG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs PRYM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PRYM.TO has a market cap of 215.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PRYM.TO trades at $1.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PRYM.TO's P/E ratio is -9.60. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PRYM.TO's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to PRYM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs FAR.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FAR.TO has a market cap of 176.66M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FAR.TO trades at $1.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FAR.TO's P/E ratio is 6.39. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FAR.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to FAR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LAM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LAM.TO has a market cap of 174.76M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LAM.TO trades at $0.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LAM.TO's P/E ratio is -23.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LAM.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs AMC.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AMC.TO has a market cap of 170.82M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AMC.TO trades at $1.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AMC.TO's P/E ratio is -5.95. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AMC.TO's ROE of -1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to AMC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ARA.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ARA.TO has a market cap of 169.82M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ARA.TO trades at $0.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ARA.TO's P/E ratio is -13.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ARA.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ARA.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs IBAT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, IBAT.CN has a market cap of 156.54M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while IBAT.CN trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas IBAT.CN's P/E ratio is -7.14. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to IBAT.CN's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and IBAT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs AOT.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AOT.TO has a market cap of 151.57M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AOT.TO trades at $0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AOT.TO's P/E ratio is -2.30. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AOT.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to AOT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs GEO.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GEO.TO has a market cap of 143.38M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GEO.TO trades at $3.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GEO.TO's P/E ratio is 11.69. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GEO.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to GEO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LGO.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LGO.TO has a market cap of 127.90M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LGO.TO trades at $2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LGO.TO's P/E ratio is -1.86. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LGO.TO's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LGO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CDPR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CDPR.CN has a market cap of 125.81M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CDPR.CN trades at $0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CDPR.CN's P/E ratio is -1.59. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CDPR.CN's ROE of -1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to CDPR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NB.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NB.TO has a market cap of 124.35M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NB.TO trades at $3.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NB.TO's P/E ratio is -1.94. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NB.TO's ROE of +2.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs FSY.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FSY.TO has a market cap of 105.34M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FSY.TO trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FSY.TO's P/E ratio is -50.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FSY.TO's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to FSY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs TLO.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TLO.TO has a market cap of 102.82M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TLO.TO trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TLO.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TLO.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TLO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MOLY.NE Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MOLY.NE has a market cap of 99.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MOLY.NE trades at $0.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MOLY.NE's P/E ratio is -20.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MOLY.NE's ROE of -1.49%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to MOLY.NE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs TI.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TI.TO has a market cap of 81.82M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TI.TO trades at $0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TI.TO's P/E ratio is 8.57. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TI.TO's ROE of -1.97%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs FURY.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FURY.TO has a market cap of 80.53M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FURY.TO trades at $0.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FURY.TO's P/E ratio is -0.73. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FURY.TO's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to FURY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs GMX.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GMX.TO has a market cap of 75.73M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GMX.TO trades at $1.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GMX.TO's P/E ratio is 67.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GMX.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to GMX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SLR.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SLR.TO has a market cap of 74.40M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SLR.TO trades at $0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SLR.TO's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SLR.TO's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SLR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs S.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, S.TO has a market cap of 66.81M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while S.TO trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas S.TO's P/E ratio is -0.78. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to S.TO's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to S.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SAU.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SAU.TO has a market cap of 65.74M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SAU.TO trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SAU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SAU.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and SAU.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NVLH.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NVLH.CN has a market cap of 62.26M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NVLH.CN trades at $0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NVLH.CN's P/E ratio is -24.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NVLH.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NVLH.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs OGD.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, OGD.TO has a market cap of 56.70M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while OGD.TO trades at $1.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas OGD.TO's P/E ratio is 10.86. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to OGD.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to OGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs WM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, WM.TO has a market cap of 54.99M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while WM.TO trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas WM.TO's P/E ratio is -5.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to WM.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and WM.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs TSK.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TSK.TO has a market cap of 49.91M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TSK.TO trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TSK.TO's P/E ratio is -3.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TSK.TO's ROE of -4.13%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TSK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs GENM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GENM.TO has a market cap of 46.21M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GENM.TO trades at $0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GENM.TO's P/E ratio is -2.17. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GENM.TO's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to GENM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs FOX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FOX.CN has a market cap of 46.19M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FOX.CN trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FOX.CN's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FOX.CN's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and FOX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs VROY.V Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VROY.V has a market cap of 45.59M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VROY.V trades at $1.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VROY.V's P/E ratio is -32.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VROY.V's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to VROY.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MIN.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MIN.TO has a market cap of 44.16M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MIN.TO trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MIN.TO's P/E ratio is -0.48. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MIN.TO's ROE of +1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MIN.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NEXT.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NEXT.TO has a market cap of 40.68M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NEXT.TO trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NEXT.TO's P/E ratio is -2.20. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NEXT.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NEXT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs RUA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RUA.CN has a market cap of 40.46M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RUA.CN trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RUA.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RUA.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to RUA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs RTG.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RTG.TO has a market cap of 39.50M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RTG.TO trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RTG.TO's P/E ratio is -3.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RTG.TO's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RTG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NCF.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NCF.TO has a market cap of 39.45M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NCF.TO trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NCF.TO's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NCF.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NCF.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs VALU.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VALU.CN has a market cap of 39.24M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VALU.CN trades at $0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VALU.CN's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VALU.CN's ROE of +10.59%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and VALU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RUA.V Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RUA.V has a market cap of 38.50M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RUA.V trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RUA.V's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RUA.V's ROE of -0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to RUA.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs TOC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TOC.CN has a market cap of 36.32M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TOC.CN trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TOC.CN's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TOC.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TOC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ARS.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ARS.CN has a market cap of 33.36M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ARS.CN trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ARS.CN's P/E ratio is -9.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ARS.CN's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ARS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs BKI.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BKI.TO has a market cap of 31.93M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BKI.TO trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BKI.TO's P/E ratio is -10.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BKI.TO's ROE of +1.99%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to BKI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs EGFV.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, EGFV.CN has a market cap of 27.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while EGFV.CN trades at $2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas EGFV.CN's P/E ratio is -100.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to EGFV.CN's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and EGFV.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs AMPS.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AMPS.CN has a market cap of 26.85M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AMPS.CN trades at $0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AMPS.CN's P/E ratio is -5.90. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AMPS.CN's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and AMPS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NICO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NICO.CN has a market cap of 24.98M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NICO.CN trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NICO.CN's P/E ratio is -14.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NICO.CN's ROE of +1.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NICO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs AAN.V Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AAN.V has a market cap of 22.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AAN.V trades at $0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AAN.V's P/E ratio is -2.19. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AAN.V's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to AAN.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs TN.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TN.CN has a market cap of 20.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TN.CN trades at $0.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TN.CN's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TN.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs URNM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, URNM.CN has a market cap of 19.36M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while URNM.CN trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas URNM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to URNM.CN's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and URNM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ASND.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ASND.TO has a market cap of 18.57M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ASND.TO trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ASND.TO's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ASND.TO's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ASND.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs EXN.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, EXN.TO has a market cap of 18.47M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while EXN.TO trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas EXN.TO's P/E ratio is -1.93. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to EXN.TO's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to EXN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs LVL.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LVL.CN has a market cap of 18.44M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LVL.CN trades at $0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LVL.CN's P/E ratio is -12.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LVL.CN's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and LVL.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs VOY.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VOY.CN has a market cap of 18.22M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VOY.CN trades at $0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VOY.CN's P/E ratio is -56.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VOY.CN's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and VOY.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SX.CN has a market cap of 16.84M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SX.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SX.CN's P/E ratio is 1.83. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SX.CN's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs WRX.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, WRX.TO has a market cap of 16.36M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while WRX.TO trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas WRX.TO's P/E ratio is 4.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to WRX.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and WRX.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs AVL.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AVL.TO has a market cap of 15.37M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AVL.TO trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AVL.TO's P/E ratio is -2.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AVL.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and AVL.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs TICO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TICO.CN has a market cap of 14.98M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TICO.CN trades at $0.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TICO.CN's P/E ratio is -75.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TICO.CN's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TICO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SLV.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SLV.CN has a market cap of 14.89M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SLV.CN trades at $0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SLV.CN's P/E ratio is -26.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SLV.CN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SLV.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SAM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SAM.TO has a market cap of 14.71M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SAM.TO trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SAM.TO's P/E ratio is -5.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SAM.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs COSA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, COSA.CN has a market cap of 14.25M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while COSA.CN trades at $0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas COSA.CN's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to COSA.CN's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to COSA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs TTX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TTX.CN has a market cap of 13.18M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TTX.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TTX.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TTX.CN's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TTX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SUPR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SUPR.CN has a market cap of 12.84M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SUPR.CN trades at $0.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SUPR.CN's P/E ratio is -20.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SUPR.CN's ROE of -116.77%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SUPR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SCY.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SCY.TO has a market cap of 12.46M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SCY.TO trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SCY.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SCY.TO's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SCY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MAXX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MAXX.CN has a market cap of 12.26M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MAXX.CN trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MAXX.CN's P/E ratio is -2.28. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MAXX.CN's ROE of -0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to MAXX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs PM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PM.CN has a market cap of 12.07M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PM.CN trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PM.CN's P/E ratio is -0.58. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PM.CN's ROE of -1.85%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and PM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs PEK.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PEK.CN has a market cap of 11.32M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PEK.CN trades at $0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PEK.CN's P/E ratio is -17.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PEK.CN's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to PEK.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NXU.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NXU.CN has a market cap of 10.76M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NXU.CN trades at $0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NXU.CN's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NXU.CN's ROE of -16.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NXU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs LIM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LIM.CN has a market cap of 9.87M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LIM.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LIM.CN's P/E ratio is 1.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LIM.CN's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and LIM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GDIG.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GDIG.CN has a market cap of 9.69M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GDIG.CN trades at $0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GDIG.CN's P/E ratio is -9.17. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GDIG.CN's ROE of -0.69%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to GDIG.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs GAMA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GAMA.CN has a market cap of 9.21M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GAMA.CN trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GAMA.CN's P/E ratio is -1.88. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GAMA.CN's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and GAMA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ELEF.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ELEF.TO has a market cap of 9.13M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ELEF.TO trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ELEF.TO's P/E ratio is -1.10. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ELEF.TO's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ELEF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs PSE.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PSE.CN has a market cap of 8.67M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PSE.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PSE.CN's P/E ratio is -6.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PSE.CN's ROE of -18.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and PSE.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs LFLR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LFLR.CN has a market cap of 8.66M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LFLR.CN trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LFLR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.69. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LFLR.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to LFLR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs KCL.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, KCL.CN has a market cap of 8.65M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while KCL.CN trades at $0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas KCL.CN's P/E ratio is -5.83. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to KCL.CN's ROE of -0.77%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and KCL.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs VBAM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VBAM.CN has a market cap of 8.48M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VBAM.CN trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VBAM.CN's P/E ratio is -8.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VBAM.CN's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and VBAM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SVB.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SVB.TO has a market cap of 8.29M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SVB.TO trades at $0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SVB.TO's P/E ratio is -17.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SVB.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SVB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs EMET.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, EMET.CN has a market cap of 8.24M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while EMET.CN trades at $0.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas EMET.CN's P/E ratio is -25.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to EMET.CN's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and EMET.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SEAG.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SEAG.CN has a market cap of 8.05M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SEAG.CN trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SEAG.CN's P/E ratio is -22.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SEAG.CN's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and SEAG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs HUNT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, HUNT.CN has a market cap of 7.92M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while HUNT.CN trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas HUNT.CN's P/E ratio is 0.26. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to HUNT.CN's ROE of +3.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to HUNT.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs XMG.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, XMG.CN has a market cap of 7.83M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while XMG.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas XMG.CN's P/E ratio is -0.42. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to XMG.CN's ROE of -3.71%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and XMG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs COVE.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, COVE.CN has a market cap of 7.58M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while COVE.CN trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas COVE.CN's P/E ratio is -0.39. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to COVE.CN's ROE of -35.74%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and COVE.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs EOX.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, EOX.TO has a market cap of 7.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while EOX.TO trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas EOX.TO's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to EOX.TO's ROE of +0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and EOX.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NVLI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NVLI.CN has a market cap of 6.59M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NVLI.CN trades at $0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NVLI.CN's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NVLI.CN's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NVLI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs FLM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FLM.CN has a market cap of 6.45M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FLM.CN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FLM.CN's P/E ratio is -2.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FLM.CN's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and FLM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs MM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MM.CN has a market cap of 6.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MM.CN trades at $0.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MM.CN's P/E ratio is -0.30. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MM.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and MM.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs CXC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CXC.CN has a market cap of 5.94M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CXC.CN trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CXC.CN's P/E ratio is -8.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CXC.CN's ROE of -1.75%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CXC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs MEO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MEO.CN has a market cap of 5.81M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MEO.CN trades at $0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MEO.CN's P/E ratio is -20.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MEO.CN's ROE of -0.98%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MEO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs IMCX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, IMCX.CN has a market cap of 5.79M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while IMCX.CN trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas IMCX.CN's P/E ratio is -0.24. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to IMCX.CN's ROE of -1.37%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and IMCX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NTH.V Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NTH.V has a market cap of 5.67M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NTH.V trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NTH.V's P/E ratio is -1.17. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NTH.V's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NTH.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CRCL.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CRCL.CN has a market cap of 5.66M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CRCL.CN trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CRCL.CN's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CRCL.CN's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to CRCL.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CELL.V Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CELL.V has a market cap of 5.65M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CELL.V trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CELL.V's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CELL.V's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to CELL.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ST.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ST.CN has a market cap of 5.39M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ST.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ST.CN's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ST.CN's ROE of -12.38%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ST.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ETR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ETR.CN has a market cap of 5.34M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ETR.CN trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ETR.CN's P/E ratio is -3.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ETR.CN's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ETR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RED.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RED.CN has a market cap of 5.27M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RED.CN trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RED.CN's P/E ratio is -7.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RED.CN's ROE of -0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to RED.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ULTH.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ULTH.CN has a market cap of 5.25M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ULTH.CN trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ULTH.CN's P/E ratio is -3.67. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ULTH.CN's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ULTH.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs AJN.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AJN.CN has a market cap of 5.05M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AJN.CN trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AJN.CN's P/E ratio is -0.80. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AJN.CN's ROE of +4.71%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and AJN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RARE.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RARE.CN has a market cap of 4.99M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RARE.CN trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RARE.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RARE.CN's ROE of -0.95%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RARE.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs FNI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FNI.CN has a market cap of 4.91M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FNI.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FNI.CN's P/E ratio is -1.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FNI.CN's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and FNI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ALCU.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ALCU.CN has a market cap of 4.71M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ALCU.CN trades at $0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ALCU.CN's P/E ratio is -0.58. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ALCU.CN's ROE of -0.80%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ALCU.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs RKL.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RKL.CN has a market cap of 4.63M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RKL.CN trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RKL.CN's P/E ratio is -2.67. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RKL.CN's ROE of -0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RKL.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RR.CN has a market cap of 4.58M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RR.CN trades at $0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.60. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RR.CN's ROE of -1.26%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to RR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ESNR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ESNR.CN has a market cap of 4.56M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ESNR.CN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ESNR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.78. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ESNR.CN's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and ESNR.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs STK.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, STK.CN has a market cap of 4.49M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while STK.CN trades at $0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas STK.CN's P/E ratio is -18.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to STK.CN's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and STK.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GLM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GLM.CN has a market cap of 4.47M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GLM.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GLM.CN's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GLM.CN's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to GLM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MIS.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MIS.CN has a market cap of 4.46M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MIS.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MIS.CN's P/E ratio is -0.83. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MIS.CN's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MIS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs TMAS.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TMAS.CN has a market cap of 4.35M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TMAS.CN trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TMAS.CN's P/E ratio is -0.52. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TMAS.CN's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TMAS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SPMT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SPMT.CN has a market cap of 4.32M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SPMT.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SPMT.CN's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SPMT.CN's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SPMT.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs RSH.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RSH.CN has a market cap of 3.95M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RSH.CN trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RSH.CN's P/E ratio is -9.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RSH.CN's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RSH.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GOH.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GOH.CN has a market cap of 3.91M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GOH.CN trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GOH.CN's P/E ratio is -0.17. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GOH.CN's ROE of -2.78%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to GOH.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs YORK.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, YORK.CN has a market cap of 3.77M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while YORK.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas YORK.CN's P/E ratio is -5.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to YORK.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and YORK.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs TERA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TERA.CN has a market cap of 3.73M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TERA.CN trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TERA.CN's P/E ratio is -1.60. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TERA.CN's ROE of -0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TERA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CDMN.NE Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CDMN.NE has a market cap of 3.65M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CDMN.NE trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CDMN.NE's P/E ratio is -1.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CDMN.NE's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CDMN.NE have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs HTRC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, HTRC.CN has a market cap of 3.54M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while HTRC.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas HTRC.CN's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to HTRC.CN's ROE of +1.43%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and HTRC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs MIA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MIA.CN has a market cap of 3.51M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MIA.CN trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MIA.CN's P/E ratio is -22.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MIA.CN's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MIA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CRUZ.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CRUZ.CN has a market cap of 3.50M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CRUZ.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CRUZ.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CRUZ.CN's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CRUZ.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs PUMP.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PUMP.CN has a market cap of 3.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PUMP.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PUMP.CN's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PUMP.CN's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and PUMP.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CC.CN has a market cap of 3.18M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CC.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CC.CN's P/E ratio is -1.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CC.CN's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to CC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CAMP.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CAMP.CN has a market cap of 3.17M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CAMP.CN trades at $0.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CAMP.CN's P/E ratio is 0.18. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CAMP.CN's ROE of +8.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CAMP.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ALMA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ALMA.CN has a market cap of 3.13M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ALMA.CN trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ALMA.CN's P/E ratio is -36.67. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ALMA.CN's ROE of -0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ALMA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs STGX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, STGX.CN has a market cap of 3.06M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while STGX.CN trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas STGX.CN's P/E ratio is -3.63. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to STGX.CN's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and STGX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SPEY.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SPEY.CN has a market cap of 3.04M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SPEY.CN trades at $0.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SPEY.CN's P/E ratio is -0.54. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SPEY.CN's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and SPEY.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs QBAT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, QBAT.CN has a market cap of 3.03M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while QBAT.CN trades at $0.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas QBAT.CN's P/E ratio is -6.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to QBAT.CN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and QBAT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NCP.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NCP.TO has a market cap of 3.03M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NCP.TO trades at $0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NCP.TO's P/E ratio is -0.67. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NCP.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NCP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NWI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NWI.CN has a market cap of 3.02M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NWI.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NWI.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NWI.CN's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NWI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CRES.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CRES.CN has a market cap of 2.97M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CRES.CN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CRES.CN's P/E ratio is -0.44. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CRES.CN's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CRES.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs UBQ.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, UBQ.CN has a market cap of 2.90M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while UBQ.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas UBQ.CN's P/E ratio is 3.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to UBQ.CN's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and UBQ.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs MUZU.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MUZU.CN has a market cap of 2.83M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MUZU.CN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MUZU.CN's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MUZU.CN's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to MUZU.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NI.CN has a market cap of 2.76M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NI.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NI.CN's P/E ratio is -0.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NI.CN's ROE of +1.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SNR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SNR.CN has a market cap of 2.75M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SNR.CN trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SNR.CN's P/E ratio is -10.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SNR.CN's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and SNR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs TRAC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TRAC.CN has a market cap of 2.69M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TRAC.CN trades at $0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TRAC.CN's P/E ratio is -1.45. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TRAC.CN's ROE of -0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TRAC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs FE.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, FE.CN has a market cap of 2.63M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while FE.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas FE.CN's P/E ratio is -0.63. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to FE.CN's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and FE.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SMC.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SMC.TO has a market cap of 2.61M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SMC.TO trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SMC.TO's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SMC.TO's ROE of -9.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SMC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ALE.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ALE.CN has a market cap of 2.53M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ALE.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ALE.CN's P/E ratio is -0.16. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ALE.CN's ROE of -2.42%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ALE.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CDN.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CDN.CN has a market cap of 2.51M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CDN.CN trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CDN.CN's P/E ratio is 1.27. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CDN.CN's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CDN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs PRR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PRR.CN has a market cap of 2.50M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PRR.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PRR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.60. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PRR.CN's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to PRR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs AWLI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AWLI.CN has a market cap of 2.40M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AWLI.CN trades at $0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AWLI.CN's P/E ratio is -0.47. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AWLI.CN's ROE of -0.97%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and AWLI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GCP.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GCP.CN has a market cap of 2.37M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GCP.CN trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GCP.CN's P/E ratio is -3.17. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GCP.CN's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and GCP.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ACME.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ACME.CN has a market cap of 2.34M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ACME.CN trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ACME.CN's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ACME.CN's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ACME.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs WO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, WO.CN has a market cap of 2.30M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while WO.CN trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas WO.CN's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to WO.CN's ROE of -0.76%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to WO.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs BULL.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BULL.CN has a market cap of 2.29M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BULL.CN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BULL.CN's P/E ratio is -0.32. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BULL.CN's ROE of -6.30%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and BULL.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ASHL.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ASHL.CN has a market cap of 2.21M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ASHL.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ASHL.CN's P/E ratio is -2.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ASHL.CN's ROE of -0.83%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ASHL.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs PRIZ.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PRIZ.CN has a market cap of 2.18M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PRIZ.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PRIZ.CN's P/E ratio is -1.10. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PRIZ.CN's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to PRIZ.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CEG.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CEG.CN has a market cap of 2.18M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CEG.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CEG.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CEG.CN's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CEG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs OWLI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, OWLI.CN has a market cap of 2.13M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while OWLI.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas OWLI.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to OWLI.CN's ROE of +0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and OWLI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RFLX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RFLX.CN has a market cap of 2.12M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RFLX.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RFLX.CN's P/E ratio is -0.88. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RFLX.CN's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RFLX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs DMC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, DMC.CN has a market cap of 2.00M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while DMC.CN trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas DMC.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to DMC.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and DMC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ATCM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ATCM.CN has a market cap of 1.94M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ATCM.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ATCM.CN's P/E ratio is 0.63. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ATCM.CN's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ATCM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RAIN.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RAIN.CN has a market cap of 1.91M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RAIN.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RAIN.CN's P/E ratio is -1.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RAIN.CN's ROE of -0.95%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RAIN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CME.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CME.CN has a market cap of 1.87M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CME.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CME.CN's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CME.CN's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CME.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CAPR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CAPR.CN has a market cap of 1.86M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CAPR.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CAPR.CN's P/E ratio is -2.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CAPR.CN's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to CAPR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs PNRG.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PNRG.CN has a market cap of 1.84M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PNRG.CN trades at $0.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PNRG.CN's P/E ratio is -0.12. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PNRG.CN's ROE of -1.58%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and PNRG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs POWR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, POWR.CN has a market cap of 1.83M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while POWR.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas POWR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.44. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to POWR.CN's ROE of -10.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and POWR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs LION.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LION.CN has a market cap of 1.81M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LION.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LION.CN's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LION.CN's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and LION.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs UUSA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, UUSA.CN has a market cap of 1.79M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while UUSA.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas UUSA.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to UUSA.CN's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and UUSA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs MEDA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MEDA.CN has a market cap of 1.73M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MEDA.CN trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MEDA.CN's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MEDA.CN's ROE of -6.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MEDA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GOR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GOR.CN has a market cap of 1.73M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GOR.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GOR.CN's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GOR.CN's ROE of +0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and GOR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs QNI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, QNI.CN has a market cap of 1.62M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while QNI.CN trades at $0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas QNI.CN's P/E ratio is 3.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to QNI.CN's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and QNI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs WBGD.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, WBGD.CN has a market cap of 1.62M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while WBGD.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas WBGD.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to WBGD.CN's ROE of -2.40%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to WBGD.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs BLNT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BLNT.CN has a market cap of 1.62M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BLNT.CN trades at $0.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BLNT.CN's P/E ratio is -4.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BLNT.CN's ROE of -3.78%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and BLNT.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs TEX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TEX.CN has a market cap of 1.50M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TEX.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TEX.CN's P/E ratio is -0.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TEX.CN's ROE of -11.92%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TEX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs REDG.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, REDG.CN has a market cap of 1.46M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while REDG.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas REDG.CN's P/E ratio is -0.88. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to REDG.CN's ROE of -0.87%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and REDG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs HMC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, HMC.CN has a market cap of 1.44M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while HMC.CN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas HMC.CN's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to HMC.CN's ROE of -0.72%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and HMC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs HECO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, HECO.CN has a market cap of 1.43M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while HECO.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas HECO.CN's P/E ratio is -0.37. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to HECO.CN's ROE of -1.81%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and HECO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CAT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CAT.CN has a market cap of 1.39M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CAT.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CAT.CN's P/E ratio is -0.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CAT.CN's ROE of +1.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CAT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CCC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CCC.CN has a market cap of 1.37M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CCC.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CCC.CN's P/E ratio is -0.17. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CCC.CN's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CCC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs HZM.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, HZM.TO has a market cap of 1.35M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while HZM.TO trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas HZM.TO's P/E ratio is -0.13. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to HZM.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and HZM.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RXM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RXM.CN has a market cap of 1.34M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RXM.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RXM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RXM.CN's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RXM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CARM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CARM.CN has a market cap of 1.32M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CARM.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CARM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CARM.CN's ROE of -7.78%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CARM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs MMI.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MMI.CN has a market cap of 1.29M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MMI.CN trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MMI.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MMI.CN's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MMI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs BJB.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BJB.CN has a market cap of 1.28M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BJB.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BJB.CN's P/E ratio is -0.33. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BJB.CN's ROE of -1.39%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and BJB.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs STAR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, STAR.CN has a market cap of 1.13M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while STAR.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas STAR.CN's P/E ratio is -5.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to STAR.CN's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and STAR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs BRCO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BRCO.CN has a market cap of 1.13M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BRCO.CN trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BRCO.CN's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BRCO.CN's ROE of +2.48%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and BRCO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs LCR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LCR.CN has a market cap of 1.11M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LCR.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LCR.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LCR.CN's ROE of +1.82%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and LCR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs VOLT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VOLT.CN has a market cap of 1.08M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VOLT.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VOLT.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VOLT.CN's ROE of +1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and VOLT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NLR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NLR.CN has a market cap of 1.07M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NLR.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NLR.CN's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NLR.CN's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NLR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs GOCO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GOCO.CN has a market cap of 1.07M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GOCO.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GOCO.CN's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GOCO.CN's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and GOCO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs EOM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, EOM.CN has a market cap of 1.07M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while EOM.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas EOM.CN's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to EOM.CN's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and EOM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs LIDA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, LIDA.CN has a market cap of 1.05M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while LIDA.CN trades at $0.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas LIDA.CN's P/E ratio is -2.38. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to LIDA.CN's ROE of +8.31%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and LIDA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs URM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, URM.CN has a market cap of 1.03M. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while URM.CN trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas URM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.12. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to URM.CN's ROE of -2.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to URM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs PLLR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PLLR.CN has a market cap of 989421.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PLLR.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PLLR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.27. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PLLR.CN's ROE of -0.97%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to PLLR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs HVW.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, HVW.CN has a market cap of 965512.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while HVW.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas HVW.CN's P/E ratio is -2.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to HVW.CN's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to HVW.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs WEST.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, WEST.CN has a market cap of 911984.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while WEST.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas WEST.CN's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to WEST.CN's ROE of -0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and WEST.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SASQ.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SASQ.CN has a market cap of 853139.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SASQ.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SASQ.CN's P/E ratio is -3.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SASQ.CN's ROE of -0.91%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and SASQ.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SLZ.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SLZ.CN has a market cap of 841908.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SLZ.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SLZ.CN's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SLZ.CN's ROE of -0.67%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and SLZ.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SCM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SCM.CN has a market cap of 816431.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SCM.CN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SCM.CN's P/E ratio is -0.22. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SCM.CN's ROE of -18.88%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SCM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs RMES.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RMES.CN has a market cap of 800714.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RMES.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RMES.CN's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RMES.CN's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RMES.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs VBN.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VBN.CN has a market cap of 796216.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VBN.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VBN.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VBN.CN's ROE of +0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and VBN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GGLD.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GGLD.CN has a market cap of 795788.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GGLD.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GGLD.CN's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GGLD.CN's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and GGLD.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs RCHR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, RCHR.CN has a market cap of 759264.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while RCHR.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas RCHR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to RCHR.CN's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and RCHR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SASY.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SASY.CN has a market cap of 748670.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SASY.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SASY.CN's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SASY.CN's ROE of -0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SASY.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs VC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VC.CN has a market cap of 735598.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VC.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VC.CN's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VC.CN's ROE of +4.47%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and VC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CRVC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CRVC.CN has a market cap of 720100.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CRVC.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CRVC.CN's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CRVC.CN's ROE of +2.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CRVC.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NSJ.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NSJ.CN has a market cap of 712770.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NSJ.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NSJ.CN's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NSJ.CN's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NSJ.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MANN.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MANN.CN has a market cap of 680200.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MANN.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MANN.CN's P/E ratio is 0.25. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MANN.CN's ROE of -2.32%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MANN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NT.CN has a market cap of 673760.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NT.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NT.CN's P/E ratio is -4.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NT.CN's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and NT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs UX.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, UX.CN has a market cap of 647808.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while UX.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas UX.CN's P/E ratio is -0.67. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to UX.CN's ROE of -6.29%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and UX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs BY.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BY.CN has a market cap of 639179.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BY.CN trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BY.CN's P/E ratio is -0.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BY.CN's ROE of -62.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and BY.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GRCM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GRCM.CN has a market cap of 610654.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GRCM.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GRCM.CN's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GRCM.CN's ROE of +4.23%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and GRCM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs ERKA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ERKA.CN has a market cap of 605748.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ERKA.CN trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ERKA.CN's P/E ratio is -0.12. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ERKA.CN's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and ERKA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs SCV.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SCV.CN has a market cap of 592855.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SCV.CN trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SCV.CN's P/E ratio is -0.18. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SCV.CN's ROE of -1.66%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to SCV.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MEGA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MEGA.CN has a market cap of 558756.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MEGA.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MEGA.CN's P/E ratio is -0.19. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MEGA.CN's ROE of -0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MEGA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs AWR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AWR.CN has a market cap of 522610.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AWR.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AWR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.12. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AWR.CN's ROE of -0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and AWR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CMT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CMT.CN has a market cap of 491836.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CMT.CN trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CMT.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CMT.CN's ROE of -1.38%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CMT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs VR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, VR.CN has a market cap of 474422.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while VR.CN trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas VR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to VR.CN's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and VR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs MYR.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MYR.CN has a market cap of 422871.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MYR.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MYR.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MYR.CN's ROE of -5.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and MYR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs CRIV.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CRIV.CN has a market cap of 418425.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CRIV.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CRIV.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CRIV.CN's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and CRIV.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs TANA.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TANA.CN has a market cap of 416504.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TANA.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TANA.CN's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TANA.CN's ROE of +1.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and TANA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs BOLT.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BOLT.CN has a market cap of 318964.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BOLT.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BOLT.CN's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BOLT.CN's ROE of +1.64%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and BOLT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs GRM.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, GRM.CN has a market cap of 184300.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while GRM.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas GRM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to GRM.CN's ROE of -1.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and GRM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs PRUD.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, PRUD.CN has a market cap of 165135.00. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while PRUD.CN trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas PRUD.CN's P/E ratio is 0.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to PRUD.CN's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and PRUD.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs UEX.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, UEX.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while UEX.TO trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas UEX.TO's P/E ratio is -35.36. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to UEX.TO's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to UEX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs AQA.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, AQA.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while AQA.TO trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas AQA.TO's P/E ratio is -3.54. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to AQA.TO's ROE of +0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to AQA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NIF-UN.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NIF-UN.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NIF-UN.TO trades at $1.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NIF-UN.TO's P/E ratio is 5.63. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NIF-UN.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NIF-UN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs COP.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, COP.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while COP.CN trades at $0.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas COP.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to COP.CN's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and COP.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs SGRO.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SGRO.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SGRO.CN trades at N/A.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SGRO.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SGRO.CN's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and SGRO.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs NEXA.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NEXA.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NEXA.TO trades at $10.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NEXA.TO's P/E ratio is 6.45. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NEXA.TO's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NEXA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs NZC.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NZC.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NZC.TO trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NZC.TO's P/E ratio is -1.58. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NZC.TO's ROE of -2.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NZC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs CAVU.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, CAVU.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while CAVU.CN trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas CAVU.CN's P/E ratio is -1.69. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to CAVU.CN's ROE of -1.20%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and CAVU.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs KWG-A.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, KWG-A.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while KWG-A.CN trades at $2.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas KWG-A.CN's P/E ratio is -132.50. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to KWG-A.CN's ROE of +2.50%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and KWG-A.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs NMX.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, NMX.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while NMX.TO trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas NMX.TO's P/E ratio is -0.31. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to NMX.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to NMX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs SP.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, SP.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while SP.CN trades at $0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas SP.CN's P/E ratio is -12.71. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to SP.CN's ROE of +1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and SP.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs INV.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, INV.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while INV.TO trades at $0.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas INV.TO's P/E ratio is -24.44. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to INV.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to INV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs QTZ.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, QTZ.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while QTZ.CN trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas QTZ.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to QTZ.CN's ROE of -0.87%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and QTZ.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs TV.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, TV.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while TV.TO trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas TV.TO's P/E ratio is 0.68. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to TV.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to TV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs ORL.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, ORL.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while ORL.TO trades at $8.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas ORL.TO's P/E ratio is -36.16. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to ORL.TO's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to ORL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs MMC.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, MMC.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while MMC.CN trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas MMC.CN's P/E ratio is -10.79. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to MMC.CN's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. FT.TO has daily volatility of 0.00 and MMC.CN has daily volatility of N/A.
FT.TO vs KWG.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, KWG.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while KWG.CN trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas KWG.CN's P/E ratio is -0.83. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to KWG.CN's ROE of +2.50%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and KWG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FT.TO vs JOSE.TO Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, JOSE.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while JOSE.TO trades at $1.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas JOSE.TO's P/E ratio is -11.88. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to JOSE.TO's ROE of +7.41%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO is less volatile compared to JOSE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FT.TO.
FT.TO vs BDN.CN Comparison
FT.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FT.TO stands at 34.33M. In comparison, BDN.CN comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, FT.TO is priced at $0.07, while BDN.CN trades at $0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FT.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -6.50, whereas BDN.CN's P/E ratio is -20.00. In terms of profitability, FT.TO's ROE is +0.36%, compared to BDN.CN's ROE of -1.66%. Regarding short-term risk, FT.TO and BDN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
Peer Comparison Table: Industrial Materials Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TECK-A.TO | $48.50 | +2.73% | 24.27B | 692.86 | $0.07 | +1.03% |
| TECK-B.TO | $48.33 | +2.79% | 24.19B | 690.43 | $0.07 | +2.06% |
| IVN.TO | $13.40 | +3.24% | 18.12B | 30.45 | $0.44 | N/A |
| AKE.TO | $8.86 | -0.56% | 5.68B | 9.53 | $0.93 | N/A |
| FIL.TO | $32.25 | -1.01% | 4.37B | -31.01 | -$1.04 | N/A |
| NGEX.TO | $12.71 | +1.27% | 2.63B | -38.52 | -$0.33 | N/A |
| SKE.TO | $17.33 | +2.00% | 1.96B | -11.33 | -$1.53 | N/A |
| FOM.TO | $3.45 | +0.29% | 1.45B | -69.00 | -$0.05 | N/A |
| ALS.TO | $26.24 | -0.72% | 1.21B | 12.38 | $2.12 | +1.37% |
| LAC.TO | $4.37 | +2.58% | 956.48M | -15.07 | -$0.29 | N/A |