Lotus Bio-Technology Development Corp.
Lotus Bio-Technology Development Corp. LBTD Peers
See (LBTD) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Agricultural Inputs Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LBTD | $0.01 | N/A | 7.8M | -1.00 | -$0.01 | N/A |
| CBLUY | $10.68 | -4.56% | 53.5B | 5.90 | $1.81 | +7.87% |
| YARIY | $18.15 | -1.47% | 18.5B | 32.41 | $0.56 | +1.33% |
| PHOJY | $22.09 | N/A | 17.5B | 3.99 | $5.53 | N/A |
| YRAIF | $32.95 | N/A | 8.4B | 29.16 | $1.13 | +1.49% |
| KPLUF | $18.62 | N/A | 3.3B | 1862.00 | $0.01 | +1.02% |
| BLONF | $0.00 | N/A | 2.8B | -0.20 | -$0.01 | N/A |
| TSDOF | $25.18 | N/A | 1.5B | 31.48 | $0.80 | +3.87% |
| CBLUF | $0.26 | N/A | 1.2B | 8.67 | $0.03 | +6.42% |
| SNFRY | $7.73 | N/A | 1.1B | 7.43 | $1.04 | +4.06% |
Stock Comparison
LBTD vs CBLUY Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, CBLUY has a market cap of 53.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while CBLUY trades at $10.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas CBLUY's P/E ratio is 5.90. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CBLUY's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to CBLUY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs YARIY Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, YARIY has a market cap of 18.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while YARIY trades at $18.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas YARIY's P/E ratio is 32.41. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to YARIY's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to YARIY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs PHOJY Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, PHOJY has a market cap of 17.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while PHOJY trades at $22.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas PHOJY's P/E ratio is 3.99. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PHOJY's ROE of +1.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to PHOJY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs YRAIF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, YRAIF has a market cap of 8.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while YRAIF trades at $32.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas YRAIF's P/E ratio is 29.16. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to YRAIF's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to YRAIF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs KPLUF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, KPLUF has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while KPLUF trades at $18.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas KPLUF's P/E ratio is 1862.00. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to KPLUF's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to KPLUF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs BLONF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, BLONF has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while BLONF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas BLONF's P/E ratio is -0.20. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BLONF's ROE of -2.60%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to BLONF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs TSDOF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, TSDOF has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while TSDOF trades at $25.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas TSDOF's P/E ratio is 31.48. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TSDOF's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to TSDOF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs CBLUF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, CBLUF has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while CBLUF trades at $0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas CBLUF's P/E ratio is 8.67. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CBLUF's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to CBLUF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs SNFRY Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, SNFRY has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while SNFRY trades at $7.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas SNFRY's P/E ratio is 7.43. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SNFRY's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to SNFRY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs SNFRF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, SNFRF has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while SNFRF trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas SNFRF's P/E ratio is 7.70. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SNFRF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to SNFRF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs BWEL Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, BWEL has a market cap of 551.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while BWEL trades at $550.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas BWEL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BWEL's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to BWEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs NUFMF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, NUFMF has a market cap of 540M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while NUFMF trades at $1.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas NUFMF's P/E ratio is -35.25. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to NUFMF's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to NUFMF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs MBCF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, MBCF has a market cap of 331M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while MBCF trades at $1.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas MBCF's P/E ratio is 3.37. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to MBCF's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to MBCF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs DNKLY Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, DNKLY has a market cap of 102.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while DNKLY trades at $0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas DNKLY's P/E ratio is -24.29. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to DNKLY's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to DNKLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs EMSNF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, EMSNF has a market cap of 58.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while EMSNF trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas EMSNF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to EMSNF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to EMSNF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs PLHCF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, PLHCF has a market cap of 54.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while PLHCF trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas PLHCF's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PLHCF's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to PLHCF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs MGROF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, MGROF has a market cap of 32.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while MGROF trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas MGROF's P/E ratio is -9.11. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to MGROF's ROE of -1.40%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to MGROF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs KNGW Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, KNGW has a market cap of 32.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while KNGW trades at $0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas KNGW's P/E ratio is -2.91. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to KNGW's ROE of -8.27%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to KNGW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs EDNSF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, EDNSF has a market cap of 26.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while EDNSF trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas EDNSF's P/E ratio is -5.00. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to EDNSF's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to EDNSF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs HMIFF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, HMIFF has a market cap of 16.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while HMIFF trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas HMIFF's P/E ratio is -5.79. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HMIFF's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to HMIFF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs VNPKF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, VNPKF has a market cap of 15.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while VNPKF trades at $0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas VNPKF's P/E ratio is -1.83. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VNPKF's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to VNPKF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs ARLSF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, ARLSF has a market cap of 10.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while ARLSF trades at $0.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas ARLSF's P/E ratio is -11.63. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ARLSF's ROE of -4.42%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to ARLSF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs VVIVF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, VVIVF has a market cap of 8.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while VVIVF trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas VVIVF's P/E ratio is -3.12. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VVIVF's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to VVIVF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs FTZZF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, FTZZF has a market cap of 6.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while FTZZF trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas FTZZF's P/E ratio is -0.70. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to FTZZF's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to FTZZF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs KRLTF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, KRLTF has a market cap of 5.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while KRLTF trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas KRLTF's P/E ratio is -5.24. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to KRLTF's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to KRLTF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs APEOF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, APEOF has a market cap of 2.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while APEOF trades at $0.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas APEOF's P/E ratio is -0.54. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to APEOF's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to APEOF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs BEVVF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, BEVVF has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while BEVVF trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas BEVVF's P/E ratio is -0.40. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BEVVF's ROE of -4.84%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to BEVVF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs ALGWF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, ALGWF has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while ALGWF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas ALGWF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ALGWF's ROE of -3.45%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to ALGWF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs EACTF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, EACTF has a market cap of 289.2K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while EACTF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas EACTF's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to EACTF's ROE of -0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to EACTF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs PTAM Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, PTAM has a market cap of 267.5K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while PTAM trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas PTAM's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PTAM's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to PTAM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs MAAFF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, MAAFF has a market cap of 75.6K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while MAAFF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas MAAFF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to MAAFF's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to MAAFF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs KWBT Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, KWBT has a market cap of 56.5K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while KWBT trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas KWBT's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to KWBT's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to KWBT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs AGYP Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, AGYP has a market cap of 21.4K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while AGYP trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas AGYP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to AGYP's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to AGYP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs IGNE Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, IGNE has a market cap of 15.7K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while IGNE trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas IGNE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to IGNE's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to IGNE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs KGET Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, KGET has a market cap of 11.9K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while KGET trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas KGET's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to KGET's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to KGET. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs HFGVF Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, HFGVF has a market cap of 6K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while HFGVF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas HFGVF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HFGVF's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to HFGVF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs SLCO Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, SLCO has a market cap of 4.7K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while SLCO trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas SLCO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SLCO's ROE of -5.46%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to SLCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs BIONQ Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, BIONQ has a market cap of 4.5K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while BIONQ trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas BIONQ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BIONQ's ROE of +1.89%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to BIONQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs HUMT Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, HUMT has a market cap of 3.7K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while HUMT trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas HUMT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HUMT's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to HUMT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs YUII Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, YUII has a market cap of 2K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while YUII trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas YUII's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to YUII's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to YUII. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs ITRO Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, ITRO has a market cap of 1.8K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while ITRO trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas ITRO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ITRO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to ITRO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs NOEC Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, NOEC has a market cap of 1.7K. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while NOEC trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas NOEC's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to NOEC's ROE of -1.68%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to NOEC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs PHOS Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, PHOS has a market cap of 841. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while PHOS trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas PHOS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PHOS's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to PHOS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs GREN Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, GREN has a market cap of 443. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while GREN trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas GREN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to GREN's ROE of -0.69%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is less volatile compared to GREN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs USBC Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, USBC has a market cap of 41. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while USBC trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas USBC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to USBC's ROE of -2.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to USBC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.
LBTD vs QCCP Comparison
LBTD plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LBTD stands at 7.8M. In comparison, QCCP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LBTD is priced at $0.01, while QCCP trades at $1,750.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LBTD currently has a P/E ratio of -1.00, whereas QCCP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LBTD's ROE is +0.00%, compared to QCCP's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LBTD is more volatile compared to QCCP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LBTD.