International Battery Metals Ltd.
International Battery Metals Ltd. IBAT.CN Peers
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$56.37 | +0.62% | 27.8B | 805.29 | CA$0.07 | +0.89% |
| TECK-B.TO | CA$56.37 | +1.48% | 27.1B | 786.71 | CA$0.07 | +1.90% |
| IVN.TO | CA$10.23 | +0.39% | 13.8B | 23.25 | 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$15.90 | +4.06% | 3.3B | -40.77 | -CA$0.39 | N/A |
| SKE.TO | CA$21.66 | +4.29% | 2.5B | -13.62 | -CA$1.59 | N/A |
| FOM.TO | CA$3.05 | -3.79% | 1.3B | -61.00 | -CA$0.05 | N/A |
| AII.TO | CA$4.48 | +4.92% | 1.3B | -26.35 | -CA$0.17 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
IBAT.CN vs TECK-A.TO Comparison
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 27.8B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TECK-A.TO trades at CA$56.37.
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 TECK-A.TO's P/E ratio is 805.29. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs TECK-B.TO Comparison
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 27.1B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TECK-B.TO trades at CA$56.37.
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 TECK-B.TO's P/E ratio is 786.71. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs IVN.TO Comparison
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 13.8B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while IVN.TO trades at CA$10.23.
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 IVN.TO's P/E ratio is 23.25. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs AKE.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs FIL.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs NGEX.TO Comparison
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 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NGEX.TO trades at CA$15.90.
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 NGEX.TO's P/E ratio is -40.77. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs SKE.TO Comparison
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 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SKE.TO trades at CA$21.66.
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 SKE.TO's P/E ratio is -13.62. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs FOM.TO Comparison
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 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FOM.TO trades at CA$3.05.
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 FOM.TO's P/E ratio is -61.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs AII.TO Comparison
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 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AII.TO trades at CA$4.48.
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 AII.TO's P/E ratio is -26.35. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs ALS.TO Comparison
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$27.38.
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 ALS.TO's P/E ratio is 12.73. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to ALS.TO's ROE of +0.20%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs VZLA.TO Comparison
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 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while VZLA.TO trades at CA$4.02.
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 VZLA.TO's P/E ratio is -134.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs NDM.TO Comparison
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 991.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NDM.TO trades at CA$1.84.
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 NDM.TO's P/E ratio is -13.14. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs LAC.TO Comparison
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 796.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LAC.TO trades at CA$3.64.
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 -12.13. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs MDI.TO Comparison
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 725.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MDI.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 MDI.TO's P/E ratio is 27.69. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to MDI.TO's ROE of +0.07%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs USA.TO Comparison
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 717.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while USA.TO trades at CA$1.10.
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 USA.TO's P/E ratio is -6.11. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs FVL.TO Comparison
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 661.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FVL.TO trades at CA$1.25.
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 FVL.TO's P/E ratio is -125.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs LAAC.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs POM.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs ETG.TO Comparison
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 425.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ETG.TO trades at CA$2.05.
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 ETG.TO's P/E ratio is -29.29. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs SOLG.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs PMET.TO Comparison
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 395.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PMET.TO trades at CA$2.44.
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 -61.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs LUCA.V Comparison
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 349.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LUCA.V trades at CA$1.33.
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 LUCA.V's P/E ratio is -13.30. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to LUCA.V's ROE of -0.24%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs WRN.TO Comparison
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 334M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while WRN.TO trades at CA$1.67.
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 WRN.TO's P/E ratio is -41.75. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to WRN.TO's ROE of -0.04%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs PRYM.TO Comparison
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 326.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PRYM.TO trades at CA$2.14.
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 PRYM.TO's P/E ratio is -16.46. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to PRYM.TO's ROE of -0.62%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs ERD.TO Comparison
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 321.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ERD.TO trades at CA$0.88.
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 -44.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to ERD.TO's ROE of -0.14%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs TMQ.TO Comparison
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 303.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TMQ.TO trades at CA$1.85.
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 TMQ.TO's P/E ratio is -26.43. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs ECOR.TO Comparison
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 296.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ECOR.TO trades at CA$1.19.
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 ECOR.TO's P/E ratio is -23.80. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs LIRC.TO Comparison
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 278M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LIRC.TO trades at CA$5.06.
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 LIRC.TO's P/E ratio is -72.29. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs MNO.TO Comparison
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 277.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MNO.TO trades at CA$0.79.
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 -9.87. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs LIFT.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs TLG.TO Comparison
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 272.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TLG.TO trades at CA$0.71.
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 -7.10. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to TLG.TO's ROE of -0.97%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs SAU.TO Comparison
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 257.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SAU.TO 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 SAU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs SMT.TO Comparison
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 246.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SMT.TO trades at CA$1.14.
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 SMT.TO's P/E ratio is 8.14. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs TLO.TO Comparison
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 239.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TLO.TO 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 TLO.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs ARA.TO Comparison
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 215.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ARA.TO trades at CA$0.98.
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 -19.60. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs GLO.TO Comparison
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 203M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GLO.TO trades at CA$0.62.
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 31.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to GLO.TO's ROE of +0.04%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs FAR.TO Comparison
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 185.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FAR.TO trades at CA$1.88.
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 6.71. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs LAM.TO Comparison
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 168.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LAM.TO trades at CA$0.64.
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 -32.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs GEO.TO Comparison
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 166M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GEO.TO trades at CA$3.52.
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 GEO.TO's P/E ratio is 9.51. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to GEO.TO's ROE of +0.08%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs MOLY.NE Comparison
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 157.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MOLY.NE trades at CA$1.32.
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 -33.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to MOLY.NE's ROE of -1.49%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs VROY.V Comparison
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 155.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while VROY.V trades at CA$2.33.
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 VROY.V's P/E ratio is -46.60. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs AMC.TO Comparison
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 136.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AMC.TO 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 AMC.TO's P/E ratio is -5.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to AMC.TO's ROE of -1.05%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs FSY.TO Comparison
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 130.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FSY.TO trades at CA$0.62.
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 -62.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs CDPR.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs NB.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs LGO.TO Comparison
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 112.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LGO.TO trades at CA$1.76.
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 LGO.TO's P/E ratio is -1.78. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs FURY.TO Comparison
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 109M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FURY.TO trades at CA$0.68.
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 -0.92. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs AOT.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs TI.TO Comparison
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 94.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TI.TO trades at CA$0.69.
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 6.90. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to TI.TO's ROE of -1.97%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and TI.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs GENM.TO Comparison
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 75.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GENM.TO trades at CA$0.32.
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 -3.20. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs GMX.TO Comparison
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 74.6M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while GMX.TO trades at CA$1.33.
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 GMX.TO's P/E ratio is 44.33. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs SLR.TO Comparison
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 74.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SLR.TO 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 SLR.TO's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs S.TO Comparison
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 72M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while S.TO 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 S.TO's P/E ratio is -0.81. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to S.TO's ROE of -0.12%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs WM.TO Comparison
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 71.5M. 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 -6.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs NCF.TO Comparison
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 69.8M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NCF.TO trades at CA$0.12.
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 -11.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to NCF.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to NCF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.
IBAT.CN vs TSK.TO Comparison
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 66.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TSK.TO trades at CA$0.47.
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 -3.32. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to TSK.TO's ROE of -4.13%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs NVLH.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to NVLH.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and NVLH.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs OGD.TO Comparison
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 60.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while OGD.TO 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 OGD.TO's P/E ratio is 10.06. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to OGD.TO's ROE of +0.09%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs ARS.CN Comparison
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 57.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ARS.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 ARS.CN's P/E ratio is -15.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs RTG.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to RTG.TO's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and RTG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs FT.TO Comparison
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 45.5M. 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 -8.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs MIN.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to MIN.TO's ROE of +1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and MIN.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs NEXT.TO Comparison
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 43.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NEXT.TO 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 NEXT.TO's P/E ratio is -2.35. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs FOX.CN Comparison
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 43.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while FOX.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 FOX.CN's P/E ratio is -27.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to FOX.CN's ROE of -0.70%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs RUA.V Comparison
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 41.3M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while RUA.V trades at CA$0.68.
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 -0.04%, compared to RUA.V's ROE of -0.79%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs RUA.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs VALU.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to VALU.CN's ROE of +10.59%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and VALU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs TOC.CN Comparison
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 35.2M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TOC.CN trades at CA$0.59.
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 -19.67. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs NICO.CN Comparison
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 34M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while NICO.CN trades at CA$0.19.
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 NICO.CN's P/E ratio is -18.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to NICO.CN's ROE of +1.00%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and NICO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs BKI.TO Comparison
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 30.6M. 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 -10.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to BKI.TO's ROE of +1.99%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and BKI.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs EGFV.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to EGFV.CN's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and EGFV.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs AMPS.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to AMPS.CN's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and AMPS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs AAN.V Comparison
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 25.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AAN.V trades at CA$0.20.
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 AAN.V's P/E ratio is -2.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to AAN.V's ROE of +1.78%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and AAN.V have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs LFLR.CN Comparison
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 24.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while LFLR.CN trades at CA$0.44.
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 -1.88. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs PM.CN Comparison
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 19.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while PM.CN trades at CA$0.19.
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 PM.CN's P/E ratio is -9.25. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to PM.CN's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and PM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs URNM.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to URNM.CN's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and URNM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs SAM.TO Comparison
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 19.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SAM.TO trades at CA$0.29.
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 -5.70. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to SAM.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.
IBAT.CN vs AVL.TO Comparison
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 18.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while AVL.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 AVL.TO's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs EXN.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to EXN.TO's ROE of -0.66%. 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.
IBAT.CN vs LVL.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs SX.CN Comparison
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 18.4M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SX.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 SX.CN's P/E ratio is 2.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs VOY.CN Comparison
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 17.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while VOY.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 VOY.CN's P/E ratio is 54.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to VOY.CN's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to VOY.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.
IBAT.CN vs TN.CN Comparison
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 17M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TN.CN trades at CA$0.13.
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 -6.50. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to TN.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and TN.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs WRX.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to WRX.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and WRX.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs SUPR.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to SUPR.CN's ROE of -116.77%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and SUPR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs TICO.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to TICO.CN's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and TICO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs COSA.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs MAXX.CN Comparison
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 14.1M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while MAXX.CN trades at CA$0.22.
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 MAXX.CN's P/E ratio is -1.10. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs ASND.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to ASND.TO's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and ASND.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs TTX.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to TTX.CN's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and TTX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs SLV.CN Comparison
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 12.7M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SLV.CN trades at CA$0.22.
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 SLV.CN's P/E ratio is -11.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs SCY.TO Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs SVB.TO Comparison
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 11.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while SVB.TO trades at CA$0.25.
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 SVB.TO's P/E ratio is -25.00. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to SVB.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to SVB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.
IBAT.CN vs PEK.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, 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.
IBAT.CN vs NXU.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to NXU.CN's ROE of -16.01%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and NXU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs ELEF.TO Comparison
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, ELEF.TO has a market cap of 10.5M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while ELEF.TO trades at CA$0.23.
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 ELEF.TO's P/E ratio is -1.05. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to ELEF.TO's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to ELEF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.
IBAT.CN vs TMAS.CN Comparison
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, TMAS.CN has a market cap of 9.9M. Regarding current trading prices, IBAT.CN is priced at CA$0.50, while TMAS.CN trades at CA$0.29.
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 TMAS.CN's P/E ratio is -5.80. In terms of profitability, IBAT.CN's ROE is -0.04%, compared to TMAS.CN's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN is less volatile compared to TMAS.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for IBAT.CN.
IBAT.CN vs LIM.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to LIM.CN's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and LIM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
IBAT.CN vs GAMA.CN Comparison
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 -0.04%, compared to GAMA.CN's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, IBAT.CN and GAMA.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).