Purpose Gold Bullion Fund
Purpose Gold Bullion Fund KILO.TO Peers
See (KILO.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Asset Management - Leveraged Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KILO.TO | CA$48.25 | -1.33% | 199.7M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| CGL.TO | CA$25.88 | -1.33% | 2.1B | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| SVR.TO | CA$17.05 | -0.29% | 166M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| HSU.TO | CA$26.47 | +1.93% | 158.7M | 28.09 | CA$0.94 | N/A |
| HND.TO | CA$6.15 | -5.67% | 158.1M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| SPXU.TO | CA$25.20 | +2.11% | 157.4M | 27.88 | CA$0.90 | N/A |
| HOU.TO | CA$10.23 | +4.07% | 77.7M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| HNU.TO | CA$35.35 | +5.84% | 74.3M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| QQD.TO | CA$8.88 | -1.88% | 59.3M | 24.02 | CA$0.37 | N/A |
| HXU.TO | CA$27.99 | +1.89% | 54.2M | 20.00 | CA$1.40 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
KILO.TO vs CGL.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, CGL.TO has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while CGL.TO trades at CA$25.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CGL.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CGL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to CGL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs SVR.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, SVR.TO has a market cap of 166M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while SVR.TO trades at CA$17.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SVR.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SVR.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to SVR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HSU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HSU.TO has a market cap of 158.7M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HSU.TO trades at CA$26.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HSU.TO's P/E ratio is 28.09. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HSU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HSU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HND.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HND.TO has a market cap of 158.1M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HND.TO trades at CA$6.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HND.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HND.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HND.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs SPXU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, SPXU.TO has a market cap of 157.4M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while SPXU.TO trades at CA$25.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SPXU.TO's P/E ratio is 27.88. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SPXU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to SPXU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HOU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HOU.TO has a market cap of 77.7M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HOU.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.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HOU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HOU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HOU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HNU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HNU.TO has a market cap of 74.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HNU.TO trades at CA$35.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HNU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HNU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HNU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs QQD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, QQD.TO has a market cap of 59.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while QQD.TO trades at CA$8.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas QQD.TO's P/E ratio is 24.02. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to QQD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to QQD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HXU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HXU.TO has a market cap of 54.2M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HXU.TO trades at CA$27.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HXU.TO's P/E ratio is 20.00. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HXU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HXU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HQD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HQD.TO has a market cap of 50.5M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HQD.TO trades at CA$10.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HQD.TO's P/E ratio is 32.71. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HQD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HQD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HSD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HSD.TO has a market cap of 46.1M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HSD.TO trades at CA$15.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HSD.TO's P/E ratio is 26.14. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HSD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HSD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs SPXD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, SPXD.TO has a market cap of 43.1M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while SPXD.TO trades at CA$14.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SPXD.TO's P/E ratio is 20.69. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SPXD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to SPXD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs CNDU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, CNDU.TO has a market cap of 42.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while CNDU.TO trades at CA$30.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CNDU.TO's P/E ratio is 22.85. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CNDU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to CNDU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HOD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HOD.TO has a market cap of 41.5M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HOD.TO trades at CA$6.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HOD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HOD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HOD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HFU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HFU.TO has a market cap of 40M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HFU.TO trades at CA$32.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HFU.TO's P/E ratio is 16.11. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HFU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HFU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs CFOU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, CFOU.TO has a market cap of 37.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while CFOU.TO trades at CA$35.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CFOU.TO's P/E ratio is 17.64. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CFOU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to CFOU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs GLDU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, GLDU.TO has a market cap of 28.9M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while GLDU.TO trades at CA$24.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GLDU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to GLDU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to GLDU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HXD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HXD.TO has a market cap of 25.8M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HXD.TO trades at CA$23.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HXD.TO's P/E ratio is 18.87. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HXD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HXD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs CNDD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, CNDD.TO has a market cap of 23.6M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while CNDD.TO trades at CA$20.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CNDD.TO's P/E ratio is 18.38. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CNDD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to CNDD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HUV.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HUV.TO has a market cap of 21.8M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HUV.TO trades at CA$7.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HUV.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HUV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HUV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HGD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HGD.TO has a market cap of 18.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HGD.TO trades at CA$26.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HGD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HBU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HBU.TO has a market cap of 17.1M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HBU.TO trades at CA$18.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HBU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HBU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HBU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs VOLX.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, VOLX.TO has a market cap of 16.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while VOLX.TO trades at CA$8.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VOLX.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VOLX.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to VOLX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs GLDD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, GLDD.TO has a market cap of 8.2M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while GLDD.TO trades at CA$16.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GLDD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to GLDD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to GLDD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs SBT.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, SBT.TO has a market cap of 7.1M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while SBT.TO trades at CA$18.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SBT.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SBT.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to SBT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HFD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HFD.TO has a market cap of 7.1M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HFD.TO trades at CA$6.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HFD.TO's P/E ratio is 15.44. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HFD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HFD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs CFOD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, CFOD.TO has a market cap of 6.7M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while CFOD.TO trades at CA$5.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CFOD.TO's P/E ratio is 13.43. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CFOD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to CFOD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HZD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HZD.TO has a market cap of 4.5M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HZD.TO trades at CA$7.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HZD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HZD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HZD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs NRGD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, NRGD.TO has a market cap of 4.5M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while NRGD.TO trades at CA$22.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NRGD.TO's P/E ratio is 9.70. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to NRGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to NRGD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs SLVD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, SLVD.TO has a market cap of 3.4M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while SLVD.TO trades at CA$5.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SLVD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SLVD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to SLVD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HRED.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HRED.TO has a market cap of 3.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HRED.TO trades at CA$14.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HRED.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HRED.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HRED.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs RITD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, RITD.TO has a market cap of 3.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while RITD.TO trades at CA$12.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RITD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to RITD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to RITD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HBD.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HBD.TO has a market cap of 3.3M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HBD.TO trades at CA$24.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HBD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HBD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to HBD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs HED.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, HED.TO has a market cap of 2.9M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while HED.TO trades at CA$23.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HED.TO's P/E ratio is 10.14. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HED.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is less volatile compared to HED.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.
KILO.TO vs PEU.TO Comparison
KILO.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, KILO.TO stands at 199.7M. In comparison, PEU.TO has a market cap of 2.1M. Regarding current trading prices, KILO.TO is priced at CA$48.25, while PEU.TO trades at CA$27.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
KILO.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PEU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, KILO.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PEU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, KILO.TO is more volatile compared to PEU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for KILO.TO.