GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (GFS) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Semiconductors Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GFS | $83.70 | +0.37% | 45.9B | 47.02 | $1.78 | +0.15% |
| NVDA | $199.00 | -0.52% | 4.8T | 30.46 | $6.53 | +0.14% |
| TSM | $440.83 | +1.02% | 2.3T | 36.63 | $12.04 | +0.81% |
| AVGO | $382.07 | +0.51% | 1.8T | 47.00 | $8.13 | +0.67% |
| MU | $1,048.51 | -0.31% | 1.2T | 47.77 | $21.92 | +0.05% |
| AMD | $519.74 | -0.02% | 846.4B | 174.18 | $2.98 | N/A |
| ASML | $1,762.77 | -0.88% | 679.7B | 59.36 | $29.71 | +0.51% |
| INTC | $131.65 | -0.48% | 663B | -216.25 | -$0.61 | N/A |
| LRCX | $374.80 | +0.93% | 468.7B | 70.32 | $5.33 | +0.29% |
| AMAT | $588.97 | +0.53% | 467.6B | 55.41 | $10.63 | +0.33% |
Stock Comparison
GFS vs NVDA Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, NVDA has a market cap of 4.8T. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while NVDA trades at $199.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas NVDA's P/E ratio is 30.46. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NVDA's ROE of +1.12%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to NVDA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check NVDA's competition here
GFS vs TSM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, TSM has a market cap of 2.3T. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while TSM trades at $440.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas TSM's P/E ratio is 36.63. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TSM's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to TSM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check TSM's competition here
GFS vs AVGO Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AVGO has a market cap of 1.8T. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AVGO trades at $382.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AVGO's P/E ratio is 47.00. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AVGO's ROE of +0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to AVGO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AVGO's competition here
GFS vs MU Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MU has a market cap of 1.2T. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MU trades at $1,048.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MU's P/E ratio is 47.77. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MU's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to MU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MU's competition here
GFS vs AMD Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AMD has a market cap of 846.4B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AMD trades at $519.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AMD's P/E ratio is 174.18. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AMD's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to AMD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AMD's competition here
GFS vs ASML Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ASML has a market cap of 679.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ASML trades at $1,762.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ASML's P/E ratio is 59.36. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ASML's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to ASML. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ASML's competition here
GFS vs INTC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, INTC has a market cap of 663B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while INTC trades at $131.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas INTC's P/E ratio is -216.25. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to INTC's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to INTC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check INTC's competition here
GFS vs LRCX Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, LRCX has a market cap of 468.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while LRCX trades at $374.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas LRCX's P/E ratio is 70.32. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LRCX's ROE of +0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to LRCX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check LRCX's competition here
GFS vs AMAT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AMAT has a market cap of 467.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AMAT trades at $588.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AMAT's P/E ratio is 55.41. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AMAT's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to AMAT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AMAT's competition here
GFS vs ARM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ARM has a market cap of 382.1B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ARM trades at $359.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ARM's P/E ratio is 202.89. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ARM's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ARM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ARM's competition here
GFS vs KLAC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, KLAC has a market cap of 314.1B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while KLAC trades at $240.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas KLAC's P/E ratio is 8.59. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to KLAC's ROE of +0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to KLAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check KLAC's competition here
GFS vs TXN Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, TXN has a market cap of 275.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while TXN trades at $303.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas TXN's P/E ratio is 51.90. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TXN's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to TXN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check TXN's competition here
GFS vs MRVL Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MRVL has a market cap of 242.1B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MRVL trades at $276.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MRVL's P/E ratio is 94.76. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MRVL's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to MRVL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MRVL's competition here
GFS vs QCOM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, QCOM has a market cap of 208B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while QCOM trades at $197.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas QCOM's P/E ratio is 16.55. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to QCOM's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to QCOM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check QCOM's competition here
GFS vs ADI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ADI has a market cap of 201.3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ADI trades at $413.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ADI's P/E ratio is 61.40. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ADI's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to ADI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ADI's competition here
GFS vs ASX Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ASX has a market cap of 90.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ASX trades at $41.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ASX's P/E ratio is 60.81. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ASX's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ASX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ASX's competition here
GFS vs NXPI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, NXPI has a market cap of 74.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while NXPI trades at $294.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas NXPI's P/E ratio is 24.04. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NXPI's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to NXPI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check NXPI's competition here
GFS vs MPWR Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MPWR has a market cap of 70.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MPWR trades at $1,434.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MPWR's P/E ratio is 76.28. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MPWR's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to MPWR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MPWR's competition here
GFS vs UMC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, UMC has a market cap of 69.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while UMC trades at $28.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas UMC's P/E ratio is 42.98. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to UMC's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to UMC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check UMC's competition here
GFS vs ALAB Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ALAB has a market cap of 68.5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ALAB trades at $399.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ALAB's P/E ratio is 268.40. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ALAB's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ALAB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ALAB's competition here
GFS vs TER Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, TER has a market cap of 66.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while TER trades at $427.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas TER's P/E ratio is 73.91. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TER's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to TER. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check TER's competition here
GFS vs STM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, STM has a market cap of 63.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while STM trades at $71.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas STM's P/E ratio is 121.92. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to STM's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to STM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check STM's competition here
GFS vs MCHP Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MCHP has a market cap of 50.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MCHP trades at $92.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MCHP's P/E ratio is 56.77. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MCHP's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to MCHP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MCHP's competition here
GFS vs ON Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ON has a market cap of 45.4B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ON trades at $115.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ON's P/E ratio is 47.47. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ON's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ON. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ON's competition here
GFS vs CBRS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, CBRS has a market cap of 40.1B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while CBRS trades at $182.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas CBRS's P/E ratio is -4560.25. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CBRS's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to CBRS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check CBRS's competition here
GFS vs Q Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, Q has a market cap of 33.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while Q trades at $158.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas Q's P/E ratio is 51.02. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to Q's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to Q. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check Q's competition here
GFS vs TSEM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, TSEM has a market cap of 30.8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while TSEM trades at $275.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas TSEM's P/E ratio is 110.97. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TSEM's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to TSEM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check TSEM's competition here
GFS vs MTSI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MTSI has a market cap of 28.5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MTSI trades at $373.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MTSI's P/E ratio is 94.45. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MTSI's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to MTSI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MTSI's competition here
GFS vs ENTG Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ENTG has a market cap of 26.1B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ENTG trades at $171.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ENTG's P/E ratio is 58.31. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ENTG's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ENTG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ENTG's competition here
GFS vs AMKR Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AMKR has a market cap of 20.5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AMKR trades at $82.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AMKR's P/E ratio is 47.57. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AMKR's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AMKR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AMKR's competition here
GFS vs LSCC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, LSCC has a market cap of 19.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while LSCC trades at $143.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas LSCC's P/E ratio is 115.14. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LSCC's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to LSCC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check LSCC's competition here
GFS vs SITM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SITM has a market cap of 18.3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SITM trades at $692.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SITM's P/E ratio is 160.67. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SITM's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to SITM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SITM's competition here
GFS vs NVMI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, NVMI has a market cap of 16.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while NVMI trades at $521.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas NVMI's P/E ratio is 65.32. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NVMI's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to NVMI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check NVMI's competition here
GFS vs ONTO Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ONTO has a market cap of 16B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ONTO trades at $322.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ONTO's P/E ratio is 149.20. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ONTO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ONTO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ONTO's competition here
GFS vs SMTC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SMTC has a market cap of 14.8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SMTC trades at $158.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SMTC's P/E ratio is 86.13. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SMTC's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to SMTC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SMTC's competition here
GFS vs RMBS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, RMBS has a market cap of 13.5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while RMBS trades at $124.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas RMBS's P/E ratio is 59.02. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to RMBS's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to RMBS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check RMBS's competition here
GFS vs AAOI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AAOI has a market cap of 11.8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AAOI trades at $146.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AAOI's P/E ratio is -445.36. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AAOI's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AAOI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AAOI's competition here
GFS vs FORM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, FORM has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while FORM trades at $141.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas FORM's P/E ratio is 87.27. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to FORM's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to FORM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check FORM's competition here
GFS vs SIMO Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SIMO has a market cap of 10.8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SIMO trades at $321.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SIMO's P/E ratio is 71.01. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SIMO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to SIMO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SIMO's competition here
GFS vs SWKS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SWKS has a market cap of 10.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SWKS trades at $71.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SWKS's P/E ratio is 29.78. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SWKS's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to SWKS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SWKS's competition here
GFS vs ALGM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ALGM has a market cap of 10.3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ALGM trades at $55.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ALGM's P/E ratio is 102.74. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ALGM's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ALGM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ALGM's competition here
GFS vs CREE Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, CREE has a market cap of 9.8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while CREE trades at $79.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas CREE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CREE's ROE of -59.38%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to CREE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check CREE's competition here
GFS vs QRVO Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, QRVO has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while QRVO trades at $97.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas QRVO's P/E ratio is 26.85. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to QRVO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to QRVO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check QRVO's competition here
GFS vs CRUS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, CRUS has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while CRUS trades at $157.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas CRUS's P/E ratio is 17.03. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CRUS's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to CRUS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check CRUS's competition here
GFS vs BRKS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, BRKS has a market cap of 7.8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while BRKS trades at $113.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas BRKS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BRKS's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to BRKS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check BRKS's competition here
GFS vs CAMT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, CAMT has a market cap of 7.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while CAMT trades at $166.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas CAMT's P/E ratio is 170.26. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CAMT's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to CAMT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check CAMT's competition here
GFS vs MXL Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MXL has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MXL trades at $84.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MXL's P/E ratio is -55.91. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MXL's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to MXL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MXL's competition here
GFS vs VSH Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, VSH has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while VSH trades at $55.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas VSH's P/E ratio is 1853.50. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to VSH's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to VSH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check VSH's competition here
GFS vs SLAB Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SLAB has a market cap of 7.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SLAB trades at $218.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SLAB's P/E ratio is -143.42. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SLAB's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to SLAB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SLAB's competition here
GFS vs ACMR Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ACMR has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ACMR trades at $101.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ACMR's P/E ratio is 68.19. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ACMR's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ACMR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ACMR's competition here
GFS vs KLIC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, KLIC has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while KLIC trades at $123.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas KLIC's P/E ratio is 78.05. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to KLIC's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to KLIC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check KLIC's competition here
GFS vs DIOD Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, DIOD has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while DIOD trades at $113.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas DIOD's P/E ratio is 77.42. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to DIOD's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to DIOD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check DIOD's competition here
GFS vs ACLS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ACLS has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ACLS trades at $168.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ACLS's P/E ratio is 37.12. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ACLS's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ACLS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ACLS's competition here
GFS vs SYNA Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SYNA has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SYNA trades at $130.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SYNA's P/E ratio is 29.57. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SYNA's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to SYNA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SYNA's competition here
GFS vs UCTT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, UCTT has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while UCTT trades at $108.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas UCTT's P/E ratio is 100.39. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to UCTT's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to UCTT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check UCTT's competition here
GFS vs IPGP Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, IPGP has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while IPGP trades at $107.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas IPGP's P/E ratio is 156.12. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to IPGP's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to IPGP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check IPGP's competition here
GFS vs POWI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, POWI has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while POWI trades at $81.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas POWI's P/E ratio is 272.87. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to POWI's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to POWI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check POWI's competition here
GFS vs NVTS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, NVTS has a market cap of 4.5B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while NVTS trades at $18.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas NVTS's P/E ratio is -29.09. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NVTS's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to NVTS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check NVTS's competition here
GFS vs VECO Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, VECO has a market cap of 4.3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while VECO trades at $71.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas VECO's P/E ratio is 187.05. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to VECO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to VECO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check VECO's competition here
GFS vs PI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, PI has a market cap of 3.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while PI trades at $127.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas PI's P/E ratio is 63.36. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to PI's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to PI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check PI's competition here
GFS vs LASR Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, LASR has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while LASR trades at $63.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas LASR's P/E ratio is 132.94. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LASR's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to LASR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check LASR's competition here
GFS vs AXTI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AXTI has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AXTI trades at $70.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AXTI's P/E ratio is -292.21. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AXTI's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AXTI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AXTI's competition here
GFS vs ICHR Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ICHR has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ICHR trades at $89.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ICHR's P/E ratio is 446.90. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ICHR's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ICHR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ICHR's competition here
GFS vs COHU Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, COHU has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while COHU trades at $63.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas COHU's P/E ratio is -353.67. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to COHU's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to COHU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check COHU's competition here
GFS vs AEHR Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AEHR has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AEHR trades at $95.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AEHR's P/E ratio is -1057.67. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AEHR's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AEHR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AEHR's competition here
GFS vs AMBA Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AMBA has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AMBA trades at $62.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AMBA's P/E ratio is 95.44. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AMBA's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AMBA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AMBA's competition here
GFS vs HIMX Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, HIMX has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while HIMX trades at $15.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas HIMX's P/E ratio is 78.68. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to HIMX's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to HIMX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check HIMX's competition here
GFS vs WOLF Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, WOLF has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while WOLF trades at $45.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas WOLF's P/E ratio is -3.46. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to WOLF's ROE of -52.09%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to WOLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check WOLF's competition here
GFS vs IMOS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, IMOS has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while IMOS trades at $62.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas IMOS's P/E ratio is 79.49. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to IMOS's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to IMOS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check IMOS's competition here
GFS vs AIP Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AIP has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AIP trades at $41.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AIP's P/E ratio is -51.94. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AIP's ROE of +4.46%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AIP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AIP's competition here
GFS vs PLAB Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, PLAB has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while PLAB trades at $31.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas PLAB's P/E ratio is 14.79. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to PLAB's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to PLAB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check PLAB's competition here
GFS vs AMBQ Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AMBQ has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AMBQ trades at $81.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AMBQ's P/E ratio is -4.08. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AMBQ's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AMBQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AMBQ's competition here
GFS vs SKYT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SKYT has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SKYT trades at $35.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SKYT's P/E ratio is -876.25. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SKYT's ROE of +0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to SKYT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SKYT's competition here
GFS vs POET Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, POET has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while POET trades at $10.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas POET's P/E ratio is -12.72. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to POET's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to POET. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check POET's competition here
GFS vs AOSL Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, AOSL has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while AOSL trades at $41.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas AOSL's P/E ratio is -144.69. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AOSL's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to AOSL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check AOSL's competition here
GFS vs CEVA Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, CEVA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while CEVA trades at $45.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas CEVA's P/E ratio is 112.59. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CEVA's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to CEVA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check CEVA's competition here
GFS vs SGH Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, SGH has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while SGH trades at $20.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas SGH's P/E ratio is -24.53. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SGH's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to SGH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check SGH's competition here
GFS vs INDI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, INDI has a market cap of 754.3M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while INDI trades at $3.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas INDI's P/E ratio is -12.75. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to INDI's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to INDI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check INDI's competition here
GFS vs QNC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, QNC has a market cap of 669.3M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while QNC trades at $3.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas QNC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to QNC's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to QNC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check QNC's competition here
GFS vs MRAM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MRAM has a market cap of 501.8M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MRAM trades at $21.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MRAM's P/E ratio is 84.85. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MRAM's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to MRAM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MRAM's competition here
GFS vs LAES Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, LAES has a market cap of 461.3M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while LAES trades at $3.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas LAES's P/E ratio is -11.59. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LAES's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to LAES. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check LAES's competition here
GFS vs NVEC Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, NVEC has a market cap of 441M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while NVEC trades at $91.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas NVEC's P/E ratio is 28.94. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NVEC's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to NVEC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check NVEC's competition here
GFS vs XPER Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, XPER has a market cap of 378.4M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while XPER trades at $7.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas XPER's P/E ratio is 9.12. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to XPER's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to XPER. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check XPER's competition here
GFS vs TGAN Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, TGAN has a market cap of 323.1M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while TGAN trades at $5.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas TGAN's P/E ratio is -7.29. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TGAN's ROE of -1.24%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to TGAN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check TGAN's competition here
GFS vs QUIK Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, QUIK has a market cap of 314.2M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while QUIK trades at $17.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas QUIK's P/E ratio is -23.64. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to QUIK's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to QUIK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check QUIK's competition here
GFS vs VLN-WT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, VLN-WT has a market cap of 313.6M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while VLN-WT trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas VLN-WT's P/E ratio is -0.13. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to VLN-WT's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to VLN-WT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check VLN-WT's competition here
GFS vs ALMU Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ALMU has a market cap of 297.4M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ALMU trades at $21.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ALMU's P/E ratio is -174.92. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ALMU's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ALMU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ALMU's competition here
GFS vs ASYS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ASYS has a market cap of 282M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ASYS trades at $19.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ASYS's P/E ratio is 67.07. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ASYS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ASYS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ASYS's competition here
GFS vs ATOM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, ATOM has a market cap of 240.8M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while ATOM trades at $7.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas ATOM's P/E ratio is -11.40. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ATOM's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to ATOM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check ATOM's competition here
GFS vs VLN Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, VLN has a market cap of 214.3M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while VLN trades at $2.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas VLN's P/E ratio is -11.97. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to VLN's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to VLN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check VLN's competition here
GFS vs INTT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, INTT has a market cap of 211.8M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while INTT trades at $16.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas INTT's P/E ratio is 51.09. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to INTT's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to INTT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check INTT's competition here
GFS vs GSIT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, GSIT has a market cap of 211.1M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while GSIT trades at $6.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas GSIT's P/E ratio is -16.17. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GSIT's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to GSIT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check GSIT's competition here
GFS vs MX Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, MX has a market cap of 177.5M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while MX trades at $4.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas MX's P/E ratio is -11.88. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MX's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to MX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check MX's competition here
GFS vs BZAIW Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, BZAIW has a market cap of 165.6M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while BZAIW trades at $0.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas BZAIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BZAIW's ROE of -5.37%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to BZAIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check BZAIW's competition here
GFS vs BZAI Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, BZAI has a market cap of 158.8M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while BZAI trades at $1.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas BZAI's P/E ratio is -2.54. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BZAI's ROE of -5.37%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to BZAI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check BZAI's competition here
GFS vs GCTS Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, GCTS has a market cap of 148.1M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while GCTS trades at $2.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas GCTS's P/E ratio is -3.16. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GCTS's ROE of +0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to GCTS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check GCTS's competition here
GFS vs OIIM Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, OIIM has a market cap of 143M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while OIIM trades at $4.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas OIIM's P/E ratio is 27.22. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to OIIM's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is more volatile compared to OIIM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check OIIM's competition here
GFS vs TRT Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, TRT has a market cap of 124.8M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while TRT trades at $12.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas TRT's P/E ratio is 221.54. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TRT's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to TRT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check TRT's competition here
GFS vs IDBA Comparison June 2026
GFS plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, GFS stands at 45.9B. In comparison, IDBA has a market cap of 90.8M. Regarding current trading prices, GFS is priced at $83.70, while IDBA trades at $4.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
GFS currently has a P/E ratio of 47.02, whereas IDBA's P/E ratio is -2.01. In terms of profitability, GFS's ROE is +0.07%, compared to IDBA's ROE of -1.56%. Regarding short-term risk, GFS is less volatile compared to IDBA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for GFS.Check IDBA's competition here