International Battery Metals Ltd.
International Battery Metals Ltd. (IBAT.CN) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (IBAT.CN) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IBAT.CN | CA$0.50 | +0.00% | 146.8M | -7.14 | -CA$0.07 | N/A |
| TECK-A.TO | CA$46.53 | -5.04% | 23.5B | 664.71 | CA$0.07 | +1.06% |
| TECK-B.TO | CA$45.23 | -5.65% | 23B | 646.14 | CA$0.07 | +2.19% |
| IVN.TO | CA$11.38 | -1.39% | 15.4B | 25.86 | CA$0.44 | N/A |
| AKE.TO | CA$8.86 | -0.56% | 5.7B | 9.53 | CA$0.93 | N/A |
| FIL.TO | CA$32.25 | -1.01% | 4.4B | -31.01 | -CA$1.04 | N/A |
| NGEX.TO | CA$19.85 | +1.69% | 4.1B | -50.92 | -CA$0.39 | N/A |
| SKE.TO | CA$21.16 | -3.56% | 2.4B | -13.31 | -CA$1.59 | N/A |
| VZLA.TO | CA$4.53 | -0.44% | 1.6B | -151.00 | -CA$0.03 | N/A |
| FOM.TO | CA$2.65 | -0.38% | 1.4B | -53.00 | -CA$0.05 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
IBAT.CN vs TECK-A.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TECK-A.TO has a market cap of 23.5B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TECK-A.TO trades at CA$46.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TECK-A.TO's P/E ratio is 664.71. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TECK-A.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TECK-A.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TECK-A.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TECK-B.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TECK-B.TO has a market cap of 23B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TECK-B.TO trades at CA$45.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TECK-B.TO's P/E ratio is 646.14. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TECK-B.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TECK-B.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TECK-B.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs IVN.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, IVN.TO has a market cap of 15.4B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while IVN.TO trades at CA$11.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas IVN.TO's P/E ratio is 25.86. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to IVN.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to IVN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check IVN.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs AKE.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, AKE.TO has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AKE.TO trades at CA$8.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas AKE.TO's P/E ratio is 9.53. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to AKE.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to AKE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check AKE.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FIL.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FIL.TO has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FIL.TO trades at CA$32.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FIL.TO's P/E ratio is -31.01. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FIL.TO's ROE of -1.18%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FIL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FIL.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NGEX.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NGEX.TO has a market cap of 4.1B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NGEX.TO trades at CA$19.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NGEX.TO's P/E ratio is -50.92. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NGEX.TO's ROE of -0.69%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to NGEX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check NGEX.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SKE.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SKE.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SKE.TO trades at CA$21.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SKE.TO's P/E ratio is -13.31. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SKE.TO's ROE of -1.34%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SKE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SKE.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs VZLA.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, VZLA.TO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while VZLA.TO trades at CA$4.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas VZLA.TO's P/E ratio is -151.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to VZLA.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to VZLA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check VZLA.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FOM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FOM.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FOM.TO trades at CA$2.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FOM.TO's P/E ratio is -53.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FOM.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FOM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FOM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs ALS.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, ALS.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ALS.TO trades at CA$28.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas ALS.TO's P/E ratio is 13.44. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to ALS.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to ALS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check ALS.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs AII.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, AII.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AII.TO trades at CA$5.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas AII.TO's P/E ratio is -21.56. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to AII.TO's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to AII.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check AII.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LAC.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LAC.TO has a market cap of 919.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LAC.TO trades at CA$4.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LAC.TO's P/E ratio is -14.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LAC.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LAC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LAC.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs USA.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, USA.TO has a market cap of 874.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while USA.TO trades at CA$1.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas USA.TO's P/E ratio is -7.44. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to USA.TO's ROE of -1.04%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to USA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check USA.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FVL.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FVL.TO has a market cap of 788.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FVL.TO trades at CA$1.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FVL.TO's P/E ratio is -149.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FVL.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FVL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FVL.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs MDI.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, MDI.TO has a market cap of 759.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MDI.TO trades at CA$9.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas MDI.TO's P/E ratio is 29.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to MDI.TO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to MDI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check MDI.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs PMET.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, PMET.TO has a market cap of 707.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PMET.TO trades at CA$4.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas PMET.TO's P/E ratio is -109.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to PMET.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to PMET.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check PMET.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NDM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NDM.TO has a market cap of 657.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NDM.TO trades at CA$1.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NDM.TO's P/E ratio is -8.71. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NDM.TO's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to NDM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check NDM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LAAC.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LAAC.TO has a market cap of 633.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LAAC.TO trades at CA$3.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LAAC.TO's P/E ratio is -39.10. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LAAC.TO's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LAAC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LAAC.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs POM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, POM.TO has a market cap of 552.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while POM.TO trades at CA$2.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas POM.TO's P/E ratio is -10.52. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to POM.TO's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to POM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check POM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SAU.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SAU.TO has a market cap of 525.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SAU.TO trades at CA$0.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SAU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SAU.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SAU.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs ETG.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, ETG.TO has a market cap of 495.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ETG.TO trades at CA$2.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas ETG.TO's P/E ratio is -34.14. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to ETG.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to ETG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check ETG.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TMQ.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TMQ.TO has a market cap of 438.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TMQ.TO trades at CA$2.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TMQ.TO's P/E ratio is -33.37. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TMQ.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TMQ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TMQ.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LUCA.V Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LUCA.V has a market cap of 424.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LUCA.V trades at CA$1.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LUCA.V's P/E ratio is -16.10. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LUCA.V's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LUCA.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LUCA.V's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SOLG.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SOLG.TO has a market cap of 405.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SOLG.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SOLG.TO's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SOLG.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SOLG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SOLG.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs WRN.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, WRN.TO has a market cap of 362M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while WRN.TO trades at CA$1.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas WRN.TO's P/E ratio is -60.33. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to WRN.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to WRN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check WRN.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs ERD.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, ERD.TO has a market cap of 347.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ERD.TO trades at CA$0.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas ERD.TO's P/E ratio is -47.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to ERD.TO's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to ERD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check ERD.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs ECOR.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, ECOR.TO has a market cap of 343.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ECOR.TO trades at CA$1.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas ECOR.TO's P/E ratio is -27.60. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to ECOR.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to ECOR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check ECOR.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs ARA.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, ARA.TO has a market cap of 338.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ARA.TO trades at CA$1.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas ARA.TO's P/E ratio is -30.80. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to ARA.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to ARA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check ARA.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LIRC.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LIRC.TO has a market cap of 334.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LIRC.TO trades at CA$6.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LIRC.TO's P/E ratio is -87.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LIRC.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LIRC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LIRC.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs PRYM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, PRYM.TO has a market cap of 332.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PRYM.TO trades at CA$2.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas PRYM.TO's P/E ratio is -16.62. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to PRYM.TO's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to PRYM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check PRYM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TLO.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TLO.TO has a market cap of 305.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TLO.TO trades at CA$0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TLO.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TLO.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TLO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TLO.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs MNO.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, MNO.TO has a market cap of 284.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MNO.TO trades at CA$0.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas MNO.TO's P/E ratio is -10.12. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to MNO.TO's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to MNO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check MNO.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LIFT.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LIFT.CN has a market cap of 276M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LIFT.CN trades at CA$7.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LIFT.CN's P/E ratio is 50.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LIFT.CN's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LIFT.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LIFT.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TLG.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TLG.TO has a market cap of 261.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TLG.TO trades at CA$0.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TLG.TO's P/E ratio is -6.60. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TLG.TO's ROE of -1.17%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TLG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TLG.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs GLO.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, GLO.TO has a market cap of 257.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GLO.TO trades at CA$0.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas GLO.TO's P/E ratio is 38.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to GLO.TO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to GLO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check GLO.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SMT.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SMT.TO has a market cap of 248.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SMT.TO trades at CA$1.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SMT.TO's P/E ratio is 8.21. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SMT.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SMT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SMT.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs MOLY.NE Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, MOLY.NE has a market cap of 189M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MOLY.NE trades at CA$1.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas MOLY.NE's P/E ratio is -52.67. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to MOLY.NE's ROE of -1.70%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to MOLY.NE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check MOLY.NE's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TI.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TI.TO has a market cap of 185.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TI.TO trades at CA$1.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TI.TO's P/E ratio is 13.60. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TI.TO's ROE of -10.64%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TI.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs VROY.V Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, VROY.V has a market cap of 185.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while VROY.V trades at CA$2.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas VROY.V's P/E ratio is -55.40. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to VROY.V's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to VROY.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check VROY.V's competition here
IBAT.CN vs GEO.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, GEO.TO has a market cap of 179.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GEO.TO trades at CA$3.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas GEO.TO's P/E ratio is 10.30. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to GEO.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to GEO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check GEO.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FAR.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FAR.TO has a market cap of 172.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FAR.TO trades at CA$1.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FAR.TO's P/E ratio is 6.25. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FAR.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FAR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FAR.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LAM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LAM.TO has a market cap of 158M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LAM.TO trades at CA$0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LAM.TO's P/E ratio is -30.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LAM.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LAM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LGO.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LGO.TO has a market cap of 140.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LGO.TO trades at CA$2.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LGO.TO's P/E ratio is -2.23. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LGO.TO's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LGO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LGO.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs CDPR.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, CDPR.CN has a market cap of 125.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while CDPR.CN trades at CA$0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas CDPR.CN's P/E ratio is -1.59. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to CDPR.CN's ROE of -1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to CDPR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check CDPR.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NB.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NB.TO has a market cap of 124.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NB.TO trades at CA$3.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NB.TO's P/E ratio is -1.94. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NB.TO's ROE of +1.72%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to NB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check NB.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FSY.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FSY.TO has a market cap of 122.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FSY.TO trades at CA$0.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FSY.TO's P/E ratio is -58.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FSY.TO's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FSY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FSY.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs AMC.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, AMC.TO has a market cap of 113.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AMC.TO trades at CA$0.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas AMC.TO's P/E ratio is -4.15. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to AMC.TO's ROE of -0.96%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to AMC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check AMC.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FURY.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FURY.TO has a market cap of 112.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FURY.TO trades at CA$0.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FURY.TO's P/E ratio is -1.01. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FURY.TO's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FURY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FURY.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs GENM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, GENM.TO has a market cap of 99.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GENM.TO trades at CA$0.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas GENM.TO's P/E ratio is -3.70. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to GENM.TO's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to GENM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check GENM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs AOT.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, AOT.TO has a market cap of 96.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AOT.TO trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas AOT.TO's P/E ratio is -1.62. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to AOT.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to AOT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check AOT.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NEXT.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NEXT.TO has a market cap of 87.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NEXT.TO trades at CA$0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NEXT.TO's P/E ratio is -4.75. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NEXT.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to NEXT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check NEXT.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SLR.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SLR.TO has a market cap of 84.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SLR.TO trades at CA$1.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SLR.TO's P/E ratio is -10.20. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SLR.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SLR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SLR.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TSK.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TSK.TO has a market cap of 80.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TSK.TO trades at CA$0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TSK.TO's P/E ratio is -4.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TSK.TO's ROE of -12.07%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TSK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TSK.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs GMX.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, GMX.TO has a market cap of 78.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GMX.TO trades at CA$1.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas GMX.TO's P/E ratio is 46.67. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to GMX.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to GMX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check GMX.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs WM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, WM.TO has a market cap of 77M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while WM.TO trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas WM.TO's P/E ratio is -7.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to WM.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to WM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check WM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs S.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, S.TO has a market cap of 69.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while S.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas S.TO's P/E ratio is -0.78. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to S.TO's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to S.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check S.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs OGD.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, OGD.TO has a market cap of 62.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while OGD.TO trades at CA$1.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas OGD.TO's P/E ratio is 10.38. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to OGD.TO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to OGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check OGD.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NVLH.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NVLH.CN has a market cap of 62.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NVLH.CN trades at CA$0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NVLH.CN's P/E ratio is -24.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NVLH.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and NVLH.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NVLH.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs RTG.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, RTG.TO has a market cap of 57.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while RTG.TO trades at CA$0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas RTG.TO's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to RTG.TO's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and RTG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check RTG.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NCF.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NCF.TO has a market cap of 51.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NCF.TO trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NCF.TO's P/E ratio is -8.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NCF.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and NCF.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NCF.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs RUA.V Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, RUA.V has a market cap of 50.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while RUA.V trades at CA$0.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas RUA.V's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to RUA.V's ROE of -0.86%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to RUA.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check RUA.V's competition here
IBAT.CN vs ARS.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, ARS.CN has a market cap of 49.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ARS.CN trades at CA$0.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas ARS.CN's P/E ratio is -13.25. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to ARS.CN's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to ARS.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check ARS.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FT.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FT.TO has a market cap of 48.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FT.TO trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FT.TO's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FT.TO's ROE of +0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FT.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs MIN.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, MIN.TO has a market cap of 44.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MIN.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas MIN.TO's P/E ratio is -0.48. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to MIN.TO's ROE of +1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and MIN.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MIN.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs RUA.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, RUA.CN has a market cap of 40.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while RUA.CN trades at CA$0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas RUA.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to RUA.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to RUA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check RUA.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TOC.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TOC.CN has a market cap of 39.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TOC.CN trades at CA$0.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TOC.CN's P/E ratio is -22.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TOC.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TOC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check TOC.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs VALU.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, VALU.CN has a market cap of 39.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while VALU.CN trades at CA$0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas VALU.CN's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to VALU.CN's ROE of +10.59%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and VALU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check VALU.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs FOX.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, FOX.CN has a market cap of 39.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FOX.CN trades at CA$0.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas FOX.CN's P/E ratio is -24.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to FOX.CN's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to FOX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check FOX.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LFLR.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LFLR.CN has a market cap of 34.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LFLR.CN trades at CA$0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LFLR.CN's P/E ratio is -2.25. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LFLR.CN's ROE of -4.37%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to LFLR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check LFLR.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs VOY.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, VOY.CN has a market cap of 32.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while VOY.CN trades at CA$1.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas VOY.CN's P/E ratio is 100.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to VOY.CN's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and VOY.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check VOY.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs PM.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, PM.CN has a market cap of 29.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PM.CN trades at CA$0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas PM.CN's P/E ratio is -12.75. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to PM.CN's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to PM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check PM.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs BKI.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, BKI.TO has a market cap of 29.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while BKI.TO trades at CA$0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas BKI.TO's P/E ratio is -9.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to BKI.TO's ROE of +1.40%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to BKI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check BKI.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs AVL.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, AVL.TO has a market cap of 28.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AVL.TO trades at CA$0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas AVL.TO's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to AVL.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to AVL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check AVL.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs EGFV.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, EGFV.CN has a market cap of 27.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while EGFV.CN trades at CA$2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas EGFV.CN's P/E ratio is -100.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to EGFV.CN's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and EGFV.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check EGFV.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs AMPS.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, AMPS.CN has a market cap of 26.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AMPS.CN trades at CA$0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas AMPS.CN's P/E ratio is -5.90. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to AMPS.CN's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and AMPS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AMPS.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs AAN.V Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, AAN.V has a market cap of 26.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AAN.V trades at CA$0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas AAN.V's P/E ratio is -2.62. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to AAN.V's ROE of +1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and AAN.V have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AAN.V's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SAM.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SAM.TO has a market cap of 23.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SAM.TO trades at CA$0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SAM.TO's P/E ratio is -5.75. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SAM.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and SAM.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SAM.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NICO.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NICO.CN has a market cap of 20.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NICO.CN trades at CA$0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NICO.CN's P/E ratio is -11.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NICO.CN's ROE of +0.99%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to NICO.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check NICO.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SX.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SX.CN has a market cap of 19.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SX.CN trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SX.CN's P/E ratio is 2.17. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SX.CN's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SX.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs URNM.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, URNM.CN has a market cap of 19.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while URNM.CN trades at CA$0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas URNM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to URNM.CN's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and URNM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check URNM.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs EXN.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, EXN.TO has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while EXN.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas EXN.TO's P/E ratio is -1.93. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to EXN.TO's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to EXN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check EXN.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LVL.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LVL.CN has a market cap of 18.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LVL.CN trades at CA$0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LVL.CN's P/E ratio is -12.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LVL.CN's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. IBAT.CN has daily volatility of 0.00 and LVL.CN has daily volatility of N/A.Check LVL.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs MAXX.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, MAXX.CN has a market cap of 17.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MAXX.CN trades at CA$0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas MAXX.CN's P/E ratio is -1.37. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to MAXX.CN's ROE of -1.17%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to MAXX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check MAXX.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs WRX.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, WRX.TO has a market cap of 16.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while WRX.TO trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas WRX.TO's P/E ratio is 4.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to WRX.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and WRX.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check WRX.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SLV.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SLV.CN has a market cap of 16.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SLV.CN trades at CA$0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SLV.CN's P/E ratio is -10.17. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SLV.CN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SLV.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SLV.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SUPR.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SUPR.CN has a market cap of 15.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SUPR.CN trades at CA$0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SUPR.CN's P/E ratio is -12.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SUPR.CN's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and SUPR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SUPR.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TICO.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TICO.CN has a market cap of 15M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TICO.CN trades at CA$0.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TICO.CN's P/E ratio is -75.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TICO.CN's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and TICO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TICO.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs COSA.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, COSA.CN has a market cap of 14.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while COSA.CN trades at CA$0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas COSA.CN's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to COSA.CN's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to COSA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check COSA.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SVB.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SVB.TO has a market cap of 14.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SVB.TO trades at CA$0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SVB.TO's P/E ratio is -30.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SVB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and SVB.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SVB.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs ASND.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, ASND.TO has a market cap of 14M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ASND.TO trades at CA$0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas ASND.TO's P/E ratio is -1.88. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to ASND.TO's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and ASND.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ASND.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TTX.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TTX.CN has a market cap of 13.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TTX.CN trades at CA$0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TTX.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TTX.CN's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and TTX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TTX.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs SCY.TO Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, SCY.TO has a market cap of 12.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SCY.TO trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas SCY.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to SCY.TO's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SCY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check SCY.TO's competition here
IBAT.CN vs PEK.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, PEK.CN has a market cap of 11.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PEK.CN trades at CA$0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas PEK.CN's P/E ratio is -17.25. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to PEK.CN's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to PEK.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.Check PEK.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs TN.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, TN.CN has a market cap of 11.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TN.CN trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas TN.CN's P/E ratio is -4.25. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to TN.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and TN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TN.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs NXU.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, NXU.CN has a market cap of 10.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NXU.CN trades at CA$0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas NXU.CN's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to NXU.CN's ROE of -16.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and NXU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NXU.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs LIM.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, LIM.CN has a market cap of 9.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LIM.CN trades at CA$0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas LIM.CN's P/E ratio is 1.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to LIM.CN's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and LIM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check LIM.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs GAMA.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, GAMA.CN has a market cap of 9.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GAMA.CN trades at CA$0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas GAMA.CN's P/E ratio is -1.88. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to GAMA.CN's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and GAMA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check GAMA.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs GDIG.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, GDIG.CN has a market cap of 9.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GDIG.CN trades at CA$0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas GDIG.CN's P/E ratio is -8.67. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to GDIG.CN's ROE of -0.69%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and GDIG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check GDIG.CN's competition here
IBAT.CN vs PSE.CN Comparison July 2025
IBAT.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, IBAT.CN stands at 146.8M. In comparison, PSE.CN has a market cap of 8.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PSE.CN trades at CA$0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
IBAT.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -7.14, whereas PSE.CN's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.34%, compared to PSE.CN's ROE of +4.50%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and PSE.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check PSE.CN's competition here